Sculpture: The Assemblage from the Theater (Corinth)

CORINTH RESULTS OF EXCAVATIONS CONDUCTED BY THE AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS

VOLUME IX, PART III

SCULPTURE THE ASSEMBLAGE FROM THE THEATER

BY MARY C. STURGEON

THE AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS 2004

ForLiz, Alex, Kelly,Marion, and Thomas

(

THE AMERICAN SCHOOL OF CLASSICAL STUDIES AT ATHENS, 2004

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication

Data

Sturgeon, Mary C. (Mary Carol), 1943Sculpture : the assemblage from the theater / by Mary C. Sturgeon. p. cm. - (Corinth;v. 9, pt. 3) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-87661-093-9 2. Corinth Theater (Corinth, Greece) 1. Sculpture, Roman-Greece-Corinth. Title. II. Series. DF261.C65 A6 vol. 9, pt. 3

I.

[NB118.G7] 938'.7 s-dc22

2004050188

[733'.5'09387]

TYPOGRAPHY CHARLTON

6-8

PRINTED BY EDWARDS

BY ASCSA PUBLICATIONS

STREET,

PRINCETON,

IN THE UNITED

BROTHERS,

STATES

INCORPORATED,

NEW JERSEY OF AMERICA

ANN ARBOR,

MICHIGAN

CONTENTS

PREFACE

vii

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

ix xiii

INTRODUCTION

1

1

SCULPTURAL DECORATION IN THE CORINTH THEATER

9

2

SCULPTURAL ASSEMBLAGES IN THEATERS IN CORINTH AND THE ROMAN EAST

29

3

DEDICATIONS OF ROMAN THEATERS IN THE GREEK EAST: QUESTIONS OF PATRONAGE

41

4

THE ROLE OF THE ROMAN THEATER

51

5

CONCLUSIONS: THE SCULPTURAL ASSEMBLAGE OF THE CORINTH THEATER

57

6

Catalogue ARCHITECTURAL SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE (1-12)

61

7

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS (13-26)

101

8

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX: STAGE, ORCHESTRA, CAVEA (27-55)

133

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES (56-84)

167

MISCELLANEOUS PIECES (85-94)

201

APPENDIX: INSCRIPTIONS FROM THE CORINTH THEATER

211

CONCORDANCE OF INVENTORY AND CATALOGUE NUMBERS

215

INDEX OF MUSEUMS

219

INDEX OF ANCIENT SOURCES

227

GENERAL INDEX

229

PLANS AND PLATES

237

9 10

PREFACE

This book on the sculptural assemblage of the Corinth Theater was designed as an extension of my study on the Theater reliefs published in 1977. At first I intended to include only freestanding sculptures, but further investigations at Corinth have revealed an additional group of architectural sculptures as well as figures in niches and between columns, which I also present here. The Theater was the site of one of the first trenches laid out in Ancient Corinth by the American School of Classical Studies at Athens in 1896, and was investigated in the succeeding campaigns of 1902, 1903, and 1908-1910. It is hoped that this volume, which appears about one hundred years later, will in some sense pay homage to those early American School excavations and the intrepid people who managed against considerable odds to initiate investigations of the Corinth Theater, especially Rufus B. Richardson (1896), F. C. Babbitt (1896), S. Bassett (1902), D. M. Robinson and T. W. Heermance (1903), G. W. Elderkin (1908), B. H. Hill (1908 and 1909), and W. B. Dinsmoor (1909 and 1910). The Corinth Theater has held the attention of, and provided the training ground for, many people over the years, repaying efforts far exceeding expectations. I wish that the earliest excavators-especially W. B. Dinsmoor, who first compiled a list of Silenos fragments, and E. M. Gardiner, who first published an article on sculptures found in the Theater-could see the reconstruction of the sculptures on the architecture in the perspective drawing byJames Herbst (Plan IV). It is indicative of the degree to which our understanding of Roman sculpture in general and of Roman theaters and their sculptural assemblages in particular has changed that the large quantity of sculptures found in the Theater could initially be explained only as sculptures that had been collected there for burning in a lime kiln. I have many people to thank for their assistance during my work on this project. The study was conducted under the auspices of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens and faciliG. Miller, William D. E. Coulson, James Muhly, and tated by its successive directors-Stephen Stephen V. Tracy. Permission for this work was granted by the Archaeological Service and its Directors of Antiquities, through the Nauplion Ephoreia of Antiquities and its ephors, P. Pachyianni and E. Spathari. I thank Charles K. Williams II, former director of the Corinth Excavations, for inviting me to study this material; Nancy Bookidis, former Assistant Director, for providing capable assistance of many kinds, patiently filling photographic orders, and giving useful comments on the manuscript; and the present director, Guy Sanders, for providing support for the architectural drawings. I am grateful to Brunilde S. Ridgway for reading earlier drafts of the manuscript and offering sage comment, to M. B. Richardson and Suzanne Abrams for careful editing, and to the reader from the Publications Committee and two anonymous readers for their useful suggestions. In addition, I have had fruitful conversations at Corinth and elsewhere with many whom I thank for their useful comments: A. Ajootian, G. and I. Despinis, C. M. Edwards,J. Fischer, E. B. Harrison, G. W. Houston,J.Jordan, D. Laing,J. C. Lavezzi, A. Mantis, O. Palagia, H. A. Shapiro, A. Stewart, R. Stroud, S. Tracy, I. Trianti, M. B. Walbank, W. West III, and students in my seminar (1989)A. Cavanaugh, N. Gifford-Martin, A. Nicgorski, and E. Seybolt.

VIiI

PREFACE

For photographic work I have had the able support of I. loannidou and L. Bartzioti. Many pieces were ably cleaned or joined by S. Bouzaki and the team of Corinth conservators:

N. Didaskalou, A. Papaioannou, and G. Arberores. The trench plan (Plan I) and architectural drawings are the work ofJ. Herbst, who used AutoCAD for the architectural perspectives (Plans

II:b, c and IV), and Adobe Photoshop for the drawingsof the griffin reliefs (P1.11), the Nereid and Triton heads (Pls. 17:b, 18:a), and the Silenos piers (Pls. 21:a, 22). A. Hooton inked drawings

of two catalogue items (Pls. 56:c, 66:c) and made state and reconstruction drawings of a third (PI. 57:b-d); and K. Dohan drew sections of three heads (PI. 30:d). The photograph of the Pergamon Hadrian (PI. 28:d) appears courtesy of the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut in

Istanbul(neg. Perg. 62-78), that of the sarcophagusfrom Patras(PI.13:c) courtesyof the Deutsches Archaologisches Institut in Athens (neg. 74/70). My work on the Theater sculptures has been supported by grants from the American Philosophical Society (1986); Research Council Grants from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill for the summers of 1985, 1986, 1988, 1989, and 1995; a Solow Summer Senior Research

Fellowship at the American School of ClassicalStudies (2001); and terms as Visiting Scholar at theJ. Paul Getty Museum (1986), and in the Department of Classics,Universityof Californiaat Berkeley (1987-1988). A Pogue Competitive Grant from the University of North Carolina (19921993), the Elizabeth A. Whitehead Professorship at the American School of Classical Studies (1998-1999), and a grant from the Fulbright Foundation (1998-1999) freed me from teaching and administrative duties so that I could complete the project. Work on the manuscript was

completed in 2001, and few references could be added after that time. October 1, 2003 Chapel Hill, North Carolina

ILLUSTRATIONS

PLANS Plan I. Plan II. Plan III. Plan IV.

Plan of the excavations (a) Restored plan of the Theater, 2nd century A.C.; (b) computer rendering of the Theater, frontal view; (c) computer rendering of the Theater, three-quarter view Reconstruction of Theater facade with sculptures Perspective reconstruction of scaenae frons with sculptural assemblage

PLATES Plate 1.

(a) Altar to Julius Caesar as divus, 1-2178; (b) revetment panel with dedication to Claudius, 42, 1-2287; (c) pavement recording gift of Erastus, aedile, 1-2436; (d) revetment panel with dedication to Titus, A.D. 79-81, I-1555; (e) epistyle block with dedication to the emperor, 1-2416, I1-2417;(f) Ionic cornice block with dedication to Trajan, 1-2448; (g) architrave-frieze block with partial dedication to the emperor, 1-359/500; (h) architrave-frieze block with partial dedication; (i) architrave-frieze block with partial dedication (a) Revetment panel with CAESARI-H, 1-2372, 1-2373; (b) revetment panel with [orna]MENTA.OM, 1-2302/2357/2391/2774; (c) revetment panel with sculptor's signature in Greek beneath Latin dedication, 1-251/2294; (d) revetment panel with donor's name, M. Antonius Aristocratis, I-356/ 357/1899/2337/2351; (e) revetment panel with SCAENA, 1-2289/2290/2392 + 1-2368/2379/2380/ 2381/2382/2390; (f) revetment with dedication from a praefectusfabrumand curatorannonae, 1-2297; (g) base of the aedile Hicesius, 1-2224; (h) revetment from dedication by a priestly official or collegiumfetialis, I-510 Portrait of Trajan 1: (a, b) head 1A Portrait of Trajan 1: (a, b) head 1A (a) Head of Trajan 1A; (b) detail of Corinth S-1065 Portrait of Trajan 1: (a) head 1A; (b, c) left hand 1B (a, b) Mantle statue, portrait of Augustus(?) 2 Draped female figure, Livia(?) 3: (a) upper torso 3A; (b-d) draped legs 3B Draped female figure, Livia(?) 3: (a-c) draped legs 3B Cuirassed statue of Hadrian (?) 4: (a) gorgoneion 4A; (b) fragmentary relief from cuirass with Nike 4B; (c) fragmentary draped torso 4C; (d) fragmentary mantle with socket 4D; (e, f) fragmentary booted leg 4E; (g) fragmentary booted right(?) foot 4F; (h) fragmentary foot with flat strap(?) 4G; (i) fragmentary left foot 4H Relief with a pair of griffins 5, reconstruction drawings: slabs A and B A.D.

Plate 2.

Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate

3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Plate 11.

Plate 12. Plate 13. Plate 14. Plate 15. Plate 16. Plate 17.

Relief with a pair of griffins 5: (a) griffin tail directed right 5A; (b)fragmentarytail in relief 5B; (c) fragmentarywing 5C; (d) relief of wing 5D; (e)relief with raised left forepaw to right 5E (a) Fragmentarybody, foreleg of griffin 5F; (b)relief of winged animal to left 5G; (c) sarcophagusfrom Patras,back side, Athens, NM 1187 (a) Male bust, Helios(?), right side of head 6A; (b, c) male bust, Helios(?), left side of head 6B; (d) male bust, Helios(?), hair fragment 6C; (e)bust of Poseidon(?) 7 (a, b)Bust of Demeter(?) 8 (a, b) Bust of Demeter(?) 8 (a, c) Relief of Nereid (or Aphrodite) 9; (b)state drawingof Nereid (or Aphrodite) 9

ILLUSTRATIONS

x Plate 18. Plate 19.

Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate

20. 21. 22. 23. 24.

Relief of Triton 10: (a) reconstruction drawing; (b) lower face 10E Relief of Triton 10: (a) dolphin swimming through wavelike hair 10A; (b) large hair segment with dolphin tail 10B; (c) hair on medallion rim 10C; (d) hair on medallion rim 10D; (e) nose 10F; f) hair on medallion rim 10G; (g) hair and left side of face 10H; (h) hair on medallion rim 10I; (i) dolphin body 10J; (j) dolphin body 10K Relief of Triton 10: (a, b) lower face 10E; (c) detail of dolphin head 10E Silenos pier A, 11: (a) reconstruction drawing; (b) lower mantle and legs lE Silenos fragments 11, 12 Silenos fragments 11, 12: (a, b) Silenos pier A, head hA; (c-e) Silenos pier B, fragmentary head 12A Silenos pier A, 11: (a) right forearm and hand 1 B; (b) raised hand with bent left arm 11C; (c) fragment from chest 11D; (d) fragment of hair, probably leg 11F; (e) right foot 11G;

(f) left foot 11H

Plate 48.

Silenos pier B, 12: (a) hairy arm 12B; (b) right(?) forearm 12C; (c) forearm 12D; (d, e) hand, left(?) 12E; (f) two fingers 12F; (g) right(?) leg 12G; (h) fragmentary hairy leg 12H; (i) hairy limb(?) 121; (j) left foot 12J Horse (with Dioskouros) 13: (a) chest and foreleg 13A; (b) fragmentary horse leg, rear left(?) 13B; (c, d) horse foreleg 13C; (e) horse leg 13D Nude standing male with cloak, Hadrian(?) 14: (a, b) left arm with mantle 14A; (c, d) left hand holding sword 14B; (e) right arm 14C (a) Nude standing male with cloak, Hadrian(?), left foot 14D; (b, c) nude standing male with cloak, Hadrian(?), right foot on plinth 14E; (d) statue of Hadrian from Pergamon (a, b) Head of Aphrodite 15 (a-c) Head of Aphrodite 15; (d) horizontal sections of 15, 19, and 20 (a, b) Head of "Ares"of Ludovisi type, from statue of Hermes(?) 16; (c, d) head of Athena 17; (e) booted legs of striding Artemis(?), right leg, feet on plinth 18A; (f) booted legs of striding Artemis(?), booted left ankle 18B (a-d) Head of Monteverde type, as an athlete 19 (a-d) Doryphoros, head 20A (a) Head of Monteverde type, as an athlete 19; (b, d) Doryphoros, head 20A; (c) head of Aphrodite 15 (a) Doryphoros, right arm 20B; (b) Doryphoros, lower left leg 20C; (c) Doryphoros, lower right leg 20D; (d) horned figure, Pan(?) 21 (a, b) Herakles hip herm 22 (a-d) Herakles hip herm 22 Chiron 23: (a, b) seated horse 23A; (c) horse foreleg 23A; (d) fragment of horse anatomy 23B; (e) fragment of horse flank 23C Youth in chlamys, musician(?) 24: (a-c) lower torso 24A (a) Youth in chlamys, musician(?), lower torso 24A; (b) youth in chlamys, musician(?), draped right shoulder 24B; (c) Antinous as Apollo in Lykeios pose, fragment from the head 25A; (d) Antinous as Apollo in Lykeios pose, fragment from the head 25B; (e) Antinous as Apollo in Lykeios pose, right hand 25D (a, b) Antinous as Apollo in Lykeios pose, upper torso 25C Dionysos as Kitharoidos 26: (a) head 26A; (b) upper arm 26B; (c) right forearm and hand 26C; (d) upper arm fragment 26D; (e) upper(?) arm fragment 26E; (f) left forearm fragment 26F (a, b) Head of an Isthmian official or victor 27 (a) Head of an Isthmian official or victor 27; (b) portrait of a Roman 28 (a, b) Portrait of a Roman 28 (a, b) Portrait of a Roman 28 (a) Fragmentary male head, Early Imperial 29; (b, c) fragmentary male head, Flavian (?) 30; (d-f) helmeted head 31 (a-c) Female head 32; (d-f) fragmentary male head 33

Plate 49.

(a) Togatus 34; (b)shoulder with paw,Herakles(?) 35; (c) right elbow 36; (d) right arm 37; (e)male

Plate 25.

Plate 26. Plate 27. Plate 28. Plate 29. Plate 30. Plate 31.

Plate Plate Plate Plate

32. 33. 34. 35.

Plate 36. Plate 37. Plate 38. Plate 39. Plate 40.

Plate 41. Plate 42. Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate

43. 44. 45. 46. 47.

figure wearing calceiwith metal tassels, right foot 38A; () male figure wearing calceiwith metal tassels,

Plate 50. Plate 51.

booted left leg and foot 38B (a) Male figure wearing calcei,right toes from booted figure 39A; (b)male figure wearing calcei,booted left leg 39B; (c)left lower leg 40; (d-f) head from statuette of Aphrodite(?) 41 (a) Statuette of Aphrodite in Europa type 42; (b)tripod support for Apollo 43; (c) Dionysos in nebris44; (d, e) satyrwith crossed legs 45

ILLUSTRATIONS Plate 52. Plate 53. Plate 54. Plate 55. Plate 56. Plate 57. Plate 58. Plate 59. Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate Plate

60. 61. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69.

Plate 70. Plate 71. Plate 72. Plate 73.

xi

(a, b) Satyr as support for Dionysos 46; (c, d) herm 47; (e, ) statuette of Priapus 48; (g) statuette of Telesphoros 49 (a-c) Altar of Dionysos(?) 50 (a-c) Altar of Apollo 51 (a) Spearlike object 52A; (b) spearlike object 52B; (c) lion from throne arm 53A; (d) lion from throne arm 53B; (e, f) torso of an imperial governor 54 (a, b) Right arm and hand 55; (c) Dionysos, left hand with grapes 56; (d, e) head of Ganymede (?) from statuette 57; (f) left arm from statuette 58; (g) fragmentary votive relief of Kybele 59 (a) Mythological relief 60; (b) drawing of 60; (c) reconstruction A, of 60, as binding a wound of Herakles; (d) reconstruction B, of 60, as the birth of Dionysos (a-c) Panther head from adjunct of Dionysos 61; (d) tree-trunk support for Dionysos or Antinous 62; (e) arm from statue of Aphrodite(?) 63 (a) Torso from statuette of Aphrodite 64; (b, c) Hygieia statuette 65; (d) head of woman with headdress 66 (a-c) Statue of an Amazon 67 (a-c) Statue of an Amazon 67 (a, b) Mantle statue 68; (c) bull's head(?) 69; (d) two feet on trapezophoros base 70 (a) Base for statue of boy victor 71; (b-e) victor stele or base(?), fragments 72A-72D (a-c) Miniature bust of Antoninus Pius(?) 73 Youth as Hermes 74: (a, b) torso 74A; (c) left forearm 74B; (d) pouch of Hermes, in right hand 74C (a, b)Youth as Hermes, torso 74A; (c) finger from bronze sculpture 75 (a, b) Female portrait 76; (c, d) head of Dionysos(?) 77 (a, b) Headless female bust 78 (a) Right hand with drapery from statuette of Aphrodite(?) 79; (b, c) fragmentary statuette of Aphrodite with bare left leg 80; (d) left arm from statuette 81; (e) hero banquet relief 82; (f) fragmentary votive relief 83; (g, h) face from votive relief 84 (a-c) Head of Dionysos 85 (a-d) Head of Herakliskos 86 (a) Right arm fragment 87; (b, c) Isis votary 88; (d) right arm from female figure 89; (e) bent right leg 90; (f) base of Aphrodite statuette 91 (a, b) Woman with polos 92; (c-e) head of a muse from a sarcophagus 93; (f; g) head of Dionysos 94

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

Adam, S. 1966. The Techniqueof GreekSculpturein theArchaic and ClassicalPeriods(BSA Suppl. 3), London. Adriani, A. 1933. "Aproposito delle repliche degli Hermes Lansdowne e Richelieu esistenti nel Museo Nazionale di Napoli," BullCom61, pp. 59-78. Agora= TheAthenianAgora:Resultsof ExcavationsConducted bytheAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens,Princeton I = E. B. Harrison, PortraitSculpture,1953. XI = E. B. Harrison, Archaic and Archaistic Sculpture, 1965. XIV = H. A. Thompson and R. E. Wycherley, TheAgoraof Athens: The History,Shape, and Usesof an Ancient City Center,1972. Arcadia Ajootian, A. 1993. "Silenusat Sparta,"in Sculpturefrom Held and Laconia (Proceedings of an InternationalConference at the AmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudies at Athens, April 10-14, 1992) (Oxbow Monograph 30), O. Palagia and W. D. E. Coulson, eds., Oxford, pp. 251-256. . 1999. "Roman Architectural Reliefs at Ancient Corinth" (paper, Washington, D.C., 1998), abstract in AJA103, p. 322. Akurgal, E. 1978. Ancient Civilizationsand Ruins of Turkey: FromPrehistoricTimesuntil the End of the Roman Empire, J. Whybrow and M. Emre, trans., 4th ed., Istanbul. .1987. Griechischeund romischeKunst in der Tiirkei, Munich. Alcock, S. E. 1993. GraeciaCapta: The Landscapesof Roman Greece,Cambridge. . 1997. "The Problem of Romanization, the Power of Athens," in TheRomanizationof Athens (Proceedingsof an International ConferenceHeld at Lincoln, Nebraska,April 1996) (Oxbow Monograph 94), M. C. Hoff and S. I. Rotroff, eds., Oxford, pp. 1-7. Altenh6fer, E., and R. Bol. 1989. "Der Eroten-Jagdfries des Theaters in Milet," IstMitt39, pp. 17-47. derKaiserzeit,BerAltmann, W. 1905. Die romischenGrabaltdre lin. Amandry, M. 1988. Le monnayagedesduovirscorinthiens(BCH Suppl. 15), Paris. Amandry, P. 1946-1948. "Naiskos en or de la collection Helene Stathatos," ASAtene24-26, pp. 181-198. Amandry, P., and T. Spyropoulos. 1974. "Monuments choregiques d'Orchomene de Beotie," BCH98, pp. 171246. Bildhauerstileim alten Amedick, R. 1987. Friihkaiserzeitliche Rom: Entwurf und Verbreitungkaiserlicher Reprdsentationskunst(Altertumswissenschaften 1), Rheinfelden. Amelung VatKat= W. Amelung, Die Sculpturendes VaticanischenMuseums,3 vols., Berlin 1903-1956. Amelung, W. 1901. "Statue der Aphrodite," RM 16, pp. 2132.

. 1926. "Der Meister des Apollon auf dem Omphalos und seine Schule,"JdI41, pp. 247-287. Anderson, G. 1993. TheSecondSophistic:A CulturalPhenomenon in theRomanEmpire,London. Anderson,J. K. 1961. AncientGreekHorsemanship,Berkeley. Anderson, M. L. 1984. "A Proposal for a New Reconstruction of the Altar of the Vicomagistri," Bollettinodei museie galleriepontificie5, pp. 33-54. Andreae, B. 1988. Laokoonund die GriindungRoms(Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 39), Mainz. , ed. 1995. BildkatalogderSkulpturendes Vatikanischen Museums1: MuseoChiaramonti,3 vols., Berlin. , ed. 1998. BildkatalogderSkulpturendes Vatikanischen Museums2: MuseoClementino,Cortileottagono,2 vols., Berlin. Mit einem Andreae, B., et al., eds. 1990. Phyromachos-Probleme: des Altares von Pergamon (RMgrossen AnhangzurDatierung EH 31), Mainz. Angel, J. L. 1945. "Skeletal Material from Attica," Hesperia 14, pp. 279-363. AntikeHelme= AntikeHelme:SammlungLipperheide und andere Bestdndedes AntikenmuseumsBerlin (R6misch-Germanisches Zentralmuseum, Monographien 14), Mainz 1988. AphrodisiasPapers 1 = C. Roueche and K. T. Erim, eds., Recent Workon and Sculpture(PapersGivenat theSecondInArchitecture ternationalAphrodisiasColloquiumHeld at King'sCollege, London, on 14 November1987) (JRA Suppl. 1), Ann Arbor 1990. 2 = R. R. R. Smith and K. T. Erim, eds., The Theatre,a (Papers Philosophers,and Coin-Types Sculptor'sWorkshop, Given at the ThirdInternationalAphrodisiasColloquium Held at New YorkUniversityon 7 and 8 April 1989) (JRA Suppl. 2), Ann Arbor 1991. 3 = C. Roueche and R. R. R. Smith, eds., TheSettingand Quarries,Mythologicaland OtherSculpturalDecoration, ArchitecturalDevelopment,Porticoof Tiberius,and Tetrapylon(PapersGivenat theFourthInternationalAphrodisias ColloquiumHeld at King's College,London, on 14 March 1992, in Memoryof Kenan T Erim) (JRASuppl. 20), Ann Arbor 1996. = Y.Maniatis, ed., Archaeometry (Proceedings of the Archaeometry Held in Ath25th InternationalSymposiumon Archaeometry ensfrom 19 to 23 May 1986), Amsterdam 1989. Argive HeraeumI = C. Waldstein, H. S. Washington, E. L. Tilton, R. B. Richardson, and J. R. Wheeler, TheArgive HeraeumI, Boston 1902. Arias, P. E. 1940. Mirone,Florence. . 1964. Policleto(Collana d'arte 7), Florence. Arndt, P. 1930. "DerKopfdes matteischen Amazonentypus," in Festschriftfur James Loeb: Zum sechzigstenGeburtstag

xiv

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

Freundenin Deutschland gewidmetvon seinenarchiiologischen und Amerika,Munich, pp. 1-4. Arnold, D. 1969. Die Polykletnachfolge:Untersuchungenzur Kunstvon Argosund SikyonzwischenPolykletund Lysipp(JdIEH25), Berlin. Artal-Isbrand, P., et al. 2002. "Examination of Remains of Gilding and Ground Layers on a Roman Marble Statue of the Goddess Hygieia," in InterdisciplinaryStudies on Ancient Stone (Proceedingsof the Fifth InternationalConferenceof ASMOSIA,June 11-15, 1998, Museumof Fine Arts, Boston) (ASMOSIA5), Boston, pp. 196-200. Ashmole, B. 1927. "Hygieia on Acropolis and Palatine," BSR 10, pp. 1-11. . 1956. "CyriacofAncona and the Temple of Hadrian at Cyzicus,"JWarb19, pp. 179-191. . 1959. "Cyriacof Ancona," PBA 45, pp. 25-41. AvP= Altertiimervon Pergamon,Berlin III = H. Winnefeld, Die Friesedes groszenAltars, 2 vols., 1910. 1896. IV = R. Bohn, Die Theater-Terrasse, V, ii = H. Stiller, Das Traianeum,1895. VII = F.Winter, Die SkulpturenmitausnahmederAltarreliefs, 2 vols., 1908. VIII, i = E. Fabricius and C. Schuchhardt, Die Inschriften von Pergamon:Bis zumEnde derKinigszeit,1890. Babbitt, F. C. 1897. "The Theatre at Corinth, 1896," AJA1, pp. 481-494. Badian, E. 1985. Rev. of B. K. Gold, Literaryand ArtisticPatronagein AncientRome,in CP80, pp. 341-357. Bammer, A. 1968. "Der Altar desjiingeren Artemisions von Ephesos," AA, cols. 400-423. . 1976. "Amazonen und das Artemision von Ephesos," RA, pp. 91-102. Barattolo, A. 1982. "Afrodisiae Roma: Nuove testamonianze per la storia della decorazione architettonica," RM 89, pp.133-151. Barr-Sharrar,B. 1987. TheHellenisticand EarlyImperialDecorativeBust, Mainz. Bartman, E. 1992. Ancient Sculptural Copies in Miniature (Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition 19), Leiden. . 1999. Portraitsof Livia: Imaging the ImperialWoman in Augustan Rome,Cambridge. Bartoccini, R. 1929. Le Termedi Lepcis,Bergamo. . 1958. "Il sarcofago di Velletri," RivlstArch,n.s. 7, pp.129-214. Bassitas II = B. C. Madigan, The Templeof ApolloBassitasII: TheSculpture,Princeton 1992. und Vorlagen:Studien zu klasBaumer, L. E. 1997. Vorbilder sischenFrauenstatuenund ihrerVerwendungfiirReliefsund Statuetten des 5. und 4. Jahrhundertsvor Christus (Acta Bernensia 12), Bern. Beacham, R. C. 1992. The Roman Theatreand Its Audience, Cambridge, Mass. Bean, G. E. 1965. SideKitabeleri/ TheInscriptionsof Side,Ankara. SouthernShore:An Archaeological . 1968. Turkey's Guide, London. . 1971. TurkeyBeyondtheMaeander:An Archaeological Guide,London. . 1978. Lycian Turkey:An ArchaeologicalGuide, London. Becatti, G. 1935. "Timarchides e l'Apollo qui tenetcitharam," BullCom63, pp. 111-131. 1968. "Una statua di Eracle con cornucopia: Pro----. blemi iconografici e stilistici," BdA53, pp. 1-11.

. 1973-1974. "Opera d'arte greca nella Roma di Tiberio," ArchCl25-26, pp. 18-53. Beck, I. 1984. Ares in Vasenmalerei:Relief und Rundplastik (Archaologische Studien 7), Frankfurt. A Studyof CyprioteVotiveSculpture, Beer, C. 1994. Temple-Boys: Part 1: Catalogue(SIMA113),Jonsered. Bejor, G. 1979. "Ladecorazione scultorea dei teatri romani nelle province africane," Prospettiva17, pp. 37-46. Princeton. Bell, M. 1981. MorgantinaStudiesI: TheTerracottas, Belli Pasqua, R. 1995. Sculturedi etdromanain "basalto"(Xenia antiqua, Monografie 2), Rome. Berczelly, L. 1988. "The Date and Significance of the Menander Mosaics at Mytilene," BICS 35, pp. 119126. Bergemann, J. 1990. RiimischeReiterstatuen:Ehrendenkmaler im offentlichenBereich(Beitrage zur Erschliessung hellenistischer und kaiserzeitlicher Skulptur und Architektur 11), Mainz. Berger, E. 1958. "Das Urbild des Kriegers aus der Villa Hadriana und die marathonische Gruppe des Phidias in Delphi," RM65, pp. 6-32. . 1971. "Ein neues Portrat Alexanders des Grossen," AntK 14, pp. 139-144. Berges, D. 1986. Hellenistische Rundaltdre Kleinasiens, Freiburg. Bergmann, B., and C. Kondoleon, eds. 1999. TheArt of AncientSpectacle(Proceedings of theSymposiumHeld 10-11 May 1996, at the Centerfor AdvancedStudy in the Visual Arts, D.C.) (Studies in the History of Art 56), WashWashington, ington, D.C. Bergmann, M. 1998. Die StrahlenderHerrscher:Theomorphes Herrscherbild und politischeSymbolikim Hellenismusund in derromischenKaiserzeit,Mainz. Bergmann, M., and P. Zanker.1981. "'Damnatio Memoriae': Umgearbeitete Nero- und Domitiansportrats. Zur Ikonographie der flavischen Kaiser und des Nerva," JdI 96, pp. 317-412. Bernardi Ferrero, D. de. 1966-1974. Teatriclassici in Asia Minore (Studi di architettura antica 1-2, 4-5), 4 vols., Rome. Bertoletti, M., et al. 1997. Sculturedi romaantica: Collezioni deiMuseiCapitolinialla CentraleMontemartini(Exhibition, Musei Capitolini, Rome 1997), Milan. Beschi, L. 1969-1970. "Divinita funerarie cirenaiche," ASAtene,n.s. 31-32, pp. 132-341. Bethe, E. 1900. "Die hellenistischen Buhnen und ihre Dekorationen," Jd 15, pp. 59-81. Bianchi Bandinelli, R. 1971. Rome, the Late Empire:Roman Art, A.D. 200-400, New York.

Bianchi Bandinelli, R., et al. 1966. The Buried City:Excavations at LeptisMagna, New York. Bieber, M. 1917. "Die Herkunft des tragischen Kostfims," JdI32, pp. 15-104. . 1943. "Greek Sculpture in the Cleveland Museum of Art,"Art in America31, pp. 113-126. . 1959. "Roman Men in Greek Himatia (Romani Palliati): A Contribution to the History of Copying," ProcPhilSoc103, pp. 374-417. . 1961a. The History of the Greekand Roman Theater, 2nd ed., rev., Princeton. . 1961b. The Sculptureof the HellenisticAge, 2nd ed., rev., New York. ---. 1964. Alexanderthe Greatin Greekand RomanArt (Argonaut Library of Antiquities), Chicago. totheHistoryof Greek 1977. AncientCopies:Contributions ----. and RomanArt, New York.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS Biers, W. R., and D.J. Geagan. 1970. "ANew List of Victors in the Caesarea at Isthmia," Hesperia39, pp. 79-93. Biolchi, D. 1938. "L'ermadi Ercole del teatro amiternino," BullCom66, pp. 31-38. London. Birley, A. R. 1997. Hadrian: TheRestlessEmperor, Blanck, H. 1971. Rev. of Niemeyer 1968, in GGA 223, pp. 86-103. ihre Blanckenhagen, P. H. von. 1940. FlavischeArchitekturund Dekoration:Untersuchtam Nervaforum,Berlin. Bloesch, H., and H. P. Isler. 1974. "Zircher Ietas-Grabung: Dritte Kampagne, 1973," AntK 17, pp. 119-120. Blimel, C. 1933. StaatlicheMuseenzu Berlin:RomischeBildnisse(Katalog der Sammlung antiker Skulpturen 6), Berlin. Boatwright, M. T. 1987. Hadrian and the City of Rome, Princeton. ---. 1989. "Hadrian and Italian Cities," Chiron 19, pp. 235-271. . 2000. Hadrian and the Cities of the Roman Empire, --Princeton. Boethius, A., andJ. B. Ward-Perkins.1970. Etruscanand RoHarmondsworth. man Architecture, Bol, P. C. 1972. Die SkulpturendesSchiffsfundesvon Antikythera (AM-BH2), Berlin. aus Bronzein Olympia( OlForsch9), . 1978. Grossplastik Berlin. . 1988. "Die Marmorbfisten aus dem Heroon von Kalydon in Agrinion, Archaologisches Museum Inv. Nr. 28-36," AntP 19, pp. 35-47. , ed. 1989-1998. Forschungenzur VillaAlbani:Katalog derantikenBildwerke(Schriften des Liebieghauses), 5 vols., Berlin. . 2001. "Zum Ohr des Doryphoros," in 'AyaorAa: rGa Me)i'?Tz yea r-v apOxac

arcztx npo0 zTIYvzou Froipyov

D. Pantermalis, M. Tiverios, and E. Voutiras,eds., Aazrew'v7, Thessaloniki, pp. 163-169. des Herodes-Atticus Bol, R. 1984. Das Statuenprogramm NymBerlin. 15), (OlForsch phdums . 1998. Amazonesvolneratae:Untersuchungenzu den EphesischenAmazonenstatuen,Mainz. Bonacasa, N. 1962. "Contributo all'iconografia di Tiberio," BdA 47, pp. 171-179. . 1964. Ritratti greci e romani della Sicilia: Catalogo, Palermo. Bonanno, A. 1976. Portraitsand OtherHeads on Roman HistoricalReliefup to theAge of SeptimiusSeverus(BAR Suppl. 6), Oxford. Bonifacio, R. 1997. Ritrattiromanida Pompei(Archaeologia perusina 14), Rome. Bookidis, N. 1988. "Classicism in Clay,"in Athens Congress III, pp. 18-21. .1998. "ArchaicCorinthian Sculpture: A Summary," in Corintoe I'Occidente (Attideltrentaquattresimo convegnodi studi sulla Magna Grecia,Taranto,7-11 ottobre1994), vol. 1, Taranto, pp. 231-256. Borbein, A. H. 1973. "Die griechische Statue des 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.: Formanalytische Untersuchungen zur Kunst der Nachklassik,"JdI88, pp. 43-212. K. Atlass Borgeaud, P. 1988. TheCultofPan in AncientGreece, andJ. Redfield, trans., Chicago. Roms aus denNekropolen Boschung, D. 1987. AntikeGrabaltdre (Acta Bernensia 10), Bern. . 1989. Rev. ofAmedick 1987, in Gnomon69, pp. 279281. . 1993. Die BildnissedesAugustus(Das r6mische Herrscherbild pt. 1, vol. 2), Berlin.

xv

. 2000. "Eineneue Replik des Typus 'Herakles KopenSeminarsder hagen/Dresden,"' Hefte des Archdologischen UniversitdtBern 17, pp. 11-14. Bowermann, H. C. 1913. "Roman Sacrificial Altars" (diss. Bryn Mawr College). Boyce, G. K. 1937. Corpusof the Lararia of Pompeii(MAAR 14), Rome. Bracker,J.1968. "EinTrauerbildnisHadrians aus K6ln,"AntP 8, pp. 75-83. Brandenburg, H. 1966. StudienzurMitra:BeitrdgezurWaffenund Trachtgeschichte derAntike(Fontes et commentationes 4), Miinster. Breckenridge,J. D. 1982. "RomanImperial Portraiturefrom Augustus to Gallienus," ANRWII.12.2, pp. 477-512. Bremen, R. van. 1993. "Women and Wealth," in Images of Womenin Antiquity,A. Cameron and A. Kuhrt, eds., 2nd ed., rev., Detroit, pp. 223-242. Brenk, B. 1987. "Spolia from Constantine to Charlemagne: Aesthetics versus Ideology," DOP41, pp. 103-109. Brilliant, R. 1967. TheArchof SeptimiusSeverusin theRoman Forum(MAAR29), Rome. Brinke, M. 1991. Kopienkritische und typologische UntersuchungenzurstatuarischenUberlieferung derAphrodite Typus Louvre-Neapel(Antiquitates 1), Hamburg. Brinkerhoff, D. 1978. HellenisticStatuesof Aphrodite:Studies in theHistoryof TheirStylisticDevelopment,New York. Brinkmann, V. 1985. "Die aufgemalten Namensbeischriften an Nord- und Ostfries des Siphnierschatzhauses," BCH 109, pp. 77-130. . 1987. "La polychromie de la sculpture archaique en marbre," PACT17, pp. 35-70. . 1998. Frisurenin Stein:Arbeitsweisen friihgriechischer Bildhauer,Munich. derParthenon-Giebel: Brommer, F 1963a. Die Skulpturen Katalog und Untersuchung,2 vols., Mainz. . 1963b. "Selene," AA, cols. 680-689. . 1967. Die Metopendes Parthenon:Katalog und Untersuchung,2 vols., Mainz. . 1977. Der Parthenonfries:Katalog und Untersuchung, 2 vols., Mainz. . 1978-1979. "Huckepack,"GettyMusJ 6-7, pp. 139-146. Broneer, 0. 1935. "Excavationsin Corinth, 1934," AJA39, pp. 53-75. . 1942. "Hero Cults in the Corinthian Agora,"Hesperia 11, pp. 128-161. . 1962. "The Isthmian Victory Crown," AJA 66, pp. 259-263. Brouskari, M. 1974. Musee de l'Acropole:Cataloguedescriptif V. Hadjimichali, trans., Athens. sur les cultesde Delos a lepoque Bruneau, P. 1970. Recherches et a (BEFAR217), Paris. impriale hellenistique l'epoque Buckler, W. H., et al. 1926. "Monuments from Central Phrygia,"JRS16, pp. 53-94. Budde, L., and R. Nicholls. 1964. A Catalogueof theGreekand RomanSculpturein theFitzwilliamMuseum,Cambridge. Bulle, H. 1928. Untersuchungen an griechischen Theatern (AbhMiinch33), Munich. Bulloch, A., et al., eds. 1993. Imagesand Ideologies:Self-Definition in theHellenisticWorld(PapersPresentedat a Conference HeldApril 7-9, 1988, at the Universityof Californiaat Berkeley) (Hellenistic Culture and Society 12), Berkeley. Burford, A. 1966. "Notes on the Epidaurian Building Inscriptions," BSA61, pp. 254-334. ~-----. 1969. The GreekTempleBuildersat Epidauros:A Social and EconomicStudyof Building in the AsklepianSanctuary during theFourthand EarlyThirdCenturiesB.c.(Liverpool

xvi

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

Monographs in Archaeology and Oriental Studies), Liverpool. Buruaga, J. A. S. de. 1982. "Observaciones sobre el teatro romano de Merida," in SimposioElTeatro,pp. 303-316. Cain, H.-U. 1988. "Chronologie, Ikonographie, und Bedeutung der r6mischen Maskenreliefs," BJb188, pp. 107221. Calza, R., et al. 1977. Antichitadi VillaDoria-Pamphilj,Rome. Capps, E., Jr. 1938. "Pergamene Influence at Corinth," Hesperia7, pp. 539-556. Caputo, G. 1959. 11 teatrodi Sabrathae l'architetturateatrale africana (Monografie di archeologia libica 6), Rome. . 1987. Il teatroaugusteo di LeptisMagna: Scavo e restauro(193 7-1951) (Monografie di archeologia libica 3), Rome. Caputo, G., and G. Traversari. 1976. Le sculturedel teatrodi Leptis Magna (Monografie di archeologia libica 13), Rome. Carandini, A. 1969. VibiaSabina:Funzionepolitica,iconografia, e il problemadel classicismoadrianeo,Florence. Carducci, C. 1959. "Un balteus daAosta," ArchC111,pp. 3649. Carpenter, R. 1928. Korinthos(AncientCorinth):A Guideto the Excavationsand Museum,Athens. - . 1929. The Sculptureof the Nike TempleParapet,Cambridge, Mass. . 1951. "AContribution to the Vergil-Menander Controversy,"Hesperia20, pp. 34-44. Carter,J. C. 1970. "Relief Sculptures from the Necropolis of Taranto," AJA74, pp. 125-137. Carton, L. 1902. Le theitreromaindeDougga (MemAclnscrXI, 2), Paris. Cassimatis, H. 1982. "A propos de couronnes sur les tetes masculines en calcaire de Chypre," RDAC,pp. 156-163. Castiglione, L. 1975. "ZurPlastik von Pompeji in der friihkolonialen Zeit," in Neue Forschungenin Pompejiund den anderenvom Vesuvausbruch79 n. Chr verschittetenStddten, B. Andreae and H. Kyrieleis, eds., Recklinghausen, pp. 211-217. Castriota, D. 1992. Myth,Ethos, and Actuality:OfficialArt in Fifth-CenturyB.C.Athens (Wisconsin Studies in Classics), Madison. . 1995. TheAra PacisAugustaeand theImageryofAbundance in Later Greek and Early Roman Imperial Art, Princeton. Chaisemartin, N. de. 1990. "Les modles grecs classiques des tetes de la frise du Portique de Tibere," in Aphrodisias Papers1, pp. 119-132. Chaisemartin, N. de, and D. Theodorescu. 1991. "Recherches preliminaires sur la frons scaenaedu theatre," in AphrodisiasPapers2, pp. 29-65. Charbonneaux, J. 1964. La sculpturegrecqueet romaine du Mus&edu Louvre,Paris. Charbonneaux,J., R. Martin, and F Villard. 1973. Hellenistic Art (330-50 B.c.),P. Green, trans., New York. Chryssoulakis,Y,E Queyrel, and V. Perdikatsis.1989. "Etude systematique des couches picturales trouvees sur quelques portraits en marbre conserv6s au Musee de Delos," in Archaeometry, pp. 231-236. Chuvin, P. 1987. "Observations sur les reliefs du theatre de Hierapolis: Themes agonistiques et legendes locales,"RA, pp. 97-108. Cima, M., and E. La Rocca, eds. 1986. Le tranquilledimore deglidei:La residenzaimperialedeglihortiLamiani (Exhibition "Romacapitale 1870-1911," Il Campidoglio, Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome, May to September 1986), Venice.

Clairmont, C. W. 1966. Die BildnissedesAntinous:Ein Beitrag zur Portrdtplastik unter Kaiser Hadrian (Bibliotheca Helvetica Romana 6), Rome. Clarac,F. de. 1841-1853. Museedesculptureantiqueet moderne, 7 vols. text, 6 vols. pls., Paris. Claridge,A. 1985. "Sullalavorazione dei marmi bianchi nella scultura dell'eta romana," StMisc26, pp. 113-117. . 1988. "Roman Statuary and the Supply of Statuary Marble,"in Fant 1988, pp. 139-152. . 1990. "Ancient Techniques of Making Joins in Marble Statuary,"in True and Podany 1990, pp. 135-162. Clement, P. A. 1972. "Isthmia Excavations,"ArchDelt25, B'1 [1970], pp. 161-167. Clinton, K. 1992. Myth and Cult: The Iconographyof the EleusinianMysteries(TheMartinP NilssonLectureson Greek Religion,Delivered19-21 November1990 at the SwedishInstituteat Athens) (SkrAth8?, 11), Stockholm. Coarelli, F. 1971-1972. "IIcomplesso pompeiano del Campo Marzio e la sua decorazione scultorea," RendPontAcc44, pp. 99-122. . 1974. Guida archeologicadi Roma,Milan. . 1981. "Alessandro,i Licinii e Lanuvio,"in L'Artdecoratif a Rome:A lafin de la Republiqueet au debutdu Principat (Tablerondeorganiseepar I'Ecolefrancaise de Rome,Rome, 10-11 mai 1979) (CIFR 55), Rome, pp. 229-281. Cohon, R. H. 1984. "Greek and Roman Stone Table Supports with Decorative Reliefs" (diss. NewYorkUniversity). Cole, S. G. 1993. "Procession and Celebration at the Dionysia," in Scodel 1993, pp. 25-38. Collart, P. 1928. "Le theatre de Philippes," BCH52, pp. 74124. Collins-Clinton,J. 2000. "The Neronian Odeum at Cosa and Its Sculptural Program: A NewJulio-Claudian Dynastic Group," MAAR45, pp. 99-130. Comstock, M. B., and C. C. Vermeule. 1976. Sculpturein Stone: TheGreek,Roman,and EtruscanCollectionsof theMuseumof Fine Arts, Boston,Boston. Conlin, D. A. 1997. TheArtistsof theAra Pacis: TheProcessof Hellenizationin RomanReliefSculpture,Chapel Hill. Connelly, J. B. 1988. VotiveSculptureof Hellenistic Cyprus, Nicosia. Conti, G. 1971. "Un bustino inedito del Museo di Pesaro," RivlstArch18, pp. 91-99. Cook, A. B. 1914-1940. Zeus:A Study in AncientReligion,3 vols., Cambridge. Corinth= Corinth:ResultsofExcavationsConductedbytheAmerican Schoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens I = H. N. Fowler and R. Stillwell, Introduction,Topography, Architecture, Cambridge, Mass., 1932. I, ii = R. Stillwell, R. L. Scranton, and S. E. Freeman, Architecture, Cambridge, Mass., 1941. I, iii = R. L. Scranton, Monumentsin theLowerAgoraand Northof theArchaicTemple,Princeton 1951. II = R. Stillwell, The Theatre,Princeton 1952. IV, ii = O. Broneer, TerracottaLamps,Cambridge, Mass., 1930. V = T. L. Shear, TheRoman Villa,Princeton 1930. VIII, i = B. D. Meritt, GreekInscriptions,1896-1927, Cambridge, Mass., 1931. VIII, ii = A. B. West, Latin Inscriptions,1896-1926, Cambridge, Mass., 1931. VIII,iii =J. H. Kent, TheInscriptions,1926-1950, Princeton 1966. IX = F. P. Johnson, Sculpture,1896-1923, Cambridge, Mass., 1931. IX, ii = M. C. Sturgeon, Sculpture:TheReliefsfrom the Theater,Princeton 1977.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS X = O. Broneer, The Odeum,Cambridge, Mass., 1932. XII = G. R. Davidson, The Minor Objects,Princeton 1952. XIV = C. Roebuck, TheAsklepieionand Lerna,Princeton 1951. XV, ii = A. N. Stillwell, ThePotters'Quarter:TheTerracottas, Princeton 1952. XVII = J. C. Biers, The GreatBath on the LechaionRoad, Princeton 1985. XVIII, iii = N. Bookidis and R. S. Stroud, TheSanctuaryof and Architecture, Demeterand Kore:Topography Princeton 1997. XX = C. K. Williams II and N. Bookidis, eds., Corinth,the Centenary:1896-1996, Princeton 2003. Coulton, J. J. 1976. TheArchitecturalDevelopmentof the Greek Stoa, Oxford. Croissant, F, andJ. Marcade. 1972. "Phocide 1: Sculptures des frontons du temple du IVesi&cle,"BCH96, pp. 887895. Crome, J. F. 1951. Die Skulpturendes Asklepiostempelsvon Epidauros,Berlin. Csapo, E., and W.J. Slater. 1995. TheContextofAncientDrama, Ann Arbor. Cumont, F. 1956. The OrientalReligionsin RomanPaganism, repr. of 1911 English translation, with introductory essay by G. Showerman, New York. Curtius, L. 1935. "Ikonographische Beitrage VIII und IX," RM 50, pp. 260-320. Dacos, N. 1961. "Le Paris d'Euphranor," BCH85, pp. 371399. Daltrop, G. 1958. Die stadtrimischenminnlichenPrivatbildnisse trajanischerund hadrianischerZeit,Miinster. Daltrop, G., U. Hausmann, and M. Wegner. 1966. DieFlavier: Vespasian, Titus, Domitian, Nerva, Julia Titi, Domitilla, Domitia (Das r6mische Herrscherbild pt. 2, vol. 1), Berlin. -ry aT6oxpaoc-ripa Datsouli-Stavridi,A. 1974. "Eixovoypaoioa AAA 7, pp. 261-267. ?XXvLx6vXpOov," Capivs;lis TO-v . 1980. "EuopoXhca-ovelxovoypaqpoaToO'Av-tv6oo," 1, pp. 345-348. 'ApXcaoyvcwacia . 1984. "Pcoiaixa& yXourc-a&roiT' 'EOvtx6Moou?io," 161-190. ArchEph,pp. 'EOvtxo6 . 1985. Potaixua& Apcxoooooytxo roprparca aTO6 MooaElor; 'A0cvaG,Athens. zumBildbegriffderRoimer Daut, R. 1975. Imago:Untersuchungen (Bibliothek der klassischen Altertumswissenschaften,n.s. pt. 2, vol. 56), Heidelberg. Daux, G. 1960. "Chronique des fouilles 1959," BCH 84, pp.617-868. . 1961. "Chronique des fouilles 1960," BCH 85, pp.583-953. - . 1963. "Chronique des fouilles 1962," BCH 87, pp.689-879. . 1967. Guidede Thasos(Sites et monuments 3), Paris. Davidson, P. E, and A. OliverJr. 1984. Ancient Greekand Roman GoldJewelryin theBrooklynMuseum(Wilbour Monographs 8), Brooklyn. Davies, P.J. E. 2000. Death and theEmperor:Roman Imperial FuneraryMonumentsfrom AugustustoMarcusAurelius,Cambridge. De Franchi, E. 1959. "Statua di Dionysos giovanetto," in Sculturegrechee romane di Cirene (Pubblicazioni della Facolta di lettere e filosofia, Universita di Padova 33), C. Anti, ed., Padua, pp. 209-226. de Grazia, C. E. 1973. "Excavationsof the American School of ClassicalStudies at Corinth: The Roman PortraitSculpture" (diss. Columbia University).

xvII

de GraziaVanderpool, C. 1995. "End of an Era:A Late Antique Portrait from Corinth" (paper, Atlanta 1994), abstract in AJA99, pp. 327-328. . 2003. "Roman Portraiture: The Many Faces of Corinth," in CorinthXX, pp. 369-384. DeLaine,J. 1997. TheBathsof Caracalla:A Studyin theDesign, Construction,and Economicsof Large-ScaleBuilding Projects in ImperialRome(JRASuppl. 25), Portsmouth, R.I. Berlin. Delbrueck, R. 1932. AntikePorphyrwerke, . 1933. Spdtantike Kaiserportrdtsvon Constantinus Berlin. Magnus bis zumEnde des Westreichs, und Akroteredes Delivorrias, A. 1974. AttischeGiebelskulpturen fiinftenJahrhunderts(Tfibinger Studien zur Archaologie und Kunstgeschichte 1), Tibingen. . 1978. "DasOriginal der sitzenden 'Aphrodite-Olympias,"' AM 93, pp. 1-23. . 1993. "DerstatuarischeTypusder sogenannten Hera (Schriften des LiebiegBorghese," in Polykletforschungen hauses, Museum alter Plastik, Frankfurt am Main), H. Beck and P. Bol, eds., Berlin, pp. 221-252. . 1995. "Polykleitos and the Allure of Feminine Beauty,"in Moon 1995, pp. 200-217. Delivorrias,A., and A. Linfert. 1983. "SkopadikaII: La statue d'Hygie dans le temple d'Alea a Tegee," BCH 107, pp.277-288. deDelos,Paris Delos= Explorationarcheologique 13 = K. Michalowski, Lesportraitshellenistiqueset romains, 1932. 16 = F. Chapouthier, Le sanctuairedesdieuxde Samothrace, 1935. 23 = A. Laumonier, Lesfigurinesde terrecuite, 1956. 28 =J. Audiat, Le gymnase,1970. Delplace, C. 1980. Legriffonde l'archaismed l'epoqueimperiale: Etude iconographiqueet essai d'interpretationsymbolique (Etudes de philologie, d'arch6ologie, et d'histoire anciennes 20), Brussels. Demakopoulou, K., and D. Konsola. 1981. Archaeological Museumof Thebes,Athens. Demargne, P., and W. A. P. Childs. 1989. Fouilles de Xanthos 8: Le monumentdes nereids:Le d&corsculpte, 2 vols., Paris. Dentzer,J.-M. 1982. Le motifdu banquetcouchedans le Procheau IV siecleavantJ.-C.(BEFAR Orientet le mondegrecdu VIPe 246), Rome. au "moinebourru'"Dieux,genies, Deonna, W. 1955. De telesphore et demonsencapuchonnes(CollLatomus21), Brussels. de Ridder, A. 1909. Collectionde Clercq:Cataloguemethodique etraisonne:Antiquitesassyriennes,cylindresorientaux,cachets, briques,bronzes,bas-reliefs,etc.,vols. 3, 4, 7, Paris. otcr avdyXucpca TtouP3iIaTzog Despini, A. 1988. "nfapaTqrpyoirtg in AthensCongressIII, pp. 70-73. To OafS8poo," zo Ipyoo -OoAyopaa7 q E-EI TOV Despinis, G. 1971. ZovILfo xpitoo, Athens. . 1988. "H Lxr-c8aBarberini," in Athens CongressIII, pp. 65-69. des 2. Jahrhundertsn. Chr.aus . 2003. Hochrelieffriese Athen,Munich. Devambez, R. 1937. "Deux piliers decores trouves a Cyzique," RA, n.s. 10, pp. 176-194. . 1941. "Sculptures d'un monument choregique, Thasos," MonPiot38, pp. 93-116. . 1942-1943. "Sculptures thasiennes," BCH 66-67, pp. 200-227. de Waele, F. J. 1930. "Die korinthischen Ausgrabungen 1928-1929," Gnomon6, pp. 52-57. . 1961. Les antiquitesde la Grece:Corintheet Saint Paul (Les hauts lieux de l'histoire 15), Paris.

XVIII

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

Dinsmoor, W. B. 1950. TheArchitectureof Ancient Greece:An AccountofIts HistoricDevelopment,3rd ed., rev. and enl. of W. J. Anderson and R. Phene Spiers, TheArchitectureof Greeceand Rome,New York. Dintsis, P. 1986. HellenistischeHelme (Archaeologica 43), 2 vols., Rome. Dohrn, T. 1957. AttischePlastik vom Todedes Phidias bis zum Wirkendergrossen MeisterdesI.Jahrhundertsv. Chr.,Krefeld. . 1968. "Die Marmor-Standbilder des DaochosWeihgeschenks in Delphi," AntP8, pp. 33-53. Dominguez, A. J. 1996. "Assembly Places and Theatres in the Greek World and Their Later Reuse for Religious Functions," in ThePnyx in the History of Athens (Proceedings of an InternationalColloquiumOrganizedbytheFinnish Institute at Athens, 7-9 October1994), B. Forsen and G. Stanton, eds., Helsinki, pp. 57-70. D6rig, J. 1977. Onatas of Aegina (Monumenta graeca et romana 1), Leiden. Dow, S., and C. C. Vermeule. 1965. "The Statue of the Damaskenos at the American School at Athens," Hesperia 34, pp. 273-297. Drager, 0. 1994. Religionemsignificare:Studienzu reichverzierten r6mischenAltdrenund Basen aus Marmor(RM-EH33), Mainz. Due bronzi= G. B. Triches, ed., Due bronzida Riace:Rinvenimento,restauro,analisi, ed ipotesidi interpretazione (BdA, special series 3), 2 vols., Rome 1984. Dunant, C. 1967. "Une applique de bronze en relief du Karl Musee de Geneve," in Gestaltund Geschichte: Festschrift Schefold,zu seinem60. Geburtstagam 26. Jan. 1965 (AntKBH 4), M. Rohde-Liegle, H. A. Cahn, and H. C. Ackermann, eds., Bern, pp. 110-114. Dunbabin, K. M. D. 1978. TheMosaicsof RomanNorthAfrica: Studiesin Iconographyand Patronage,Oxford. Duncan-Jones, R. P. 1982. TheEconomyof theRomanEmpire: QuantitativeStudies,2nd ed., Cambridge. . 1990. Structureand Scalein theRomanEconomy,Cambridge. Dyggve, E., F. Poulsen, and K.A. Rhomaios. 1934. DasHeroon von Kalydon,Copenhagen. Eckstein, F. 1967. "Ephedrismos-Gruppeim KonservatorenPalast,"AntP 6, pp. 75-88. . 1985. "T& ---a3ora xarcqy6-OX," AJA89, pp. 613-617. Edwards, C. M. 1985. "Greek Votive Reliefs to Pan and the Nymphs" (diss. New York University). . 1993. "A Complex of Copies at Ancient Corinth" (paper, New Orleans 1992), abstract in AJA97, p. 300. .1994. "The Arch over the Lechaion Road at Corinth and Its Sculpture," Hesperia63, pp. 263-308. Egger, R. 1948. "Der hilfreiche Kleine im Kapuzenmantel," OJh37, pp. 90-111. Eichler, F 1958. "Eine neue Amazone und andere Skulpturen aus dem Theater von Ephesos," OJh43, pp. 15-18. . 1971. "ZumPartherdenkmal von Ephesos," OJh49, Beiheft 2, pp. 102-136. Eingartner,J. 1991. Isis und ihreDienerinnenin derKunst der romischenKaiserzeit(MnemosyneSuppl. 115), Leiden. Elsner,J. 1998. ImperialRomeand ChristianTriumph:TheArt of theRomanEmpireA.D.100-450, Oxford. archiiologischen Ephesos= Forschungenin Ephesos,Osterreichischen Institut in Wien,Vienna II = R. Heberdey, G. Hiemann, and W. Wilberg, Das Theaterin Ephesos,1912. V, i = W. Wilberg, Die Bibliothek,1953. X, i = M. Aurenhammer, Die Skulpturenvon Ephesos:Bildwerkeaus Stein:IdealplastikI, 1990.

Erim, K. T., and R. R. R. Smith. 1991. "Sculpture from the Theatre: A Preliminary Report," in AphrodisiasPapers2, pp. 67-98. etateliers,BrusEvers,C. 1994. Lesportraitsd'Hadrien:Typologie sels. Fabbricotti, E. 1976. Galba,Rome. Fabbrini, L. 1964. "Il ritratto giovanile di Tiberio e la iconografia di Druso Maggiore," BdA 49, pp. 304-326. Fant,J. C., ed. 1988. AncientMarbleQuarryingand Trade(Papersfrom a ColloquiumHeld at theAnnual Meetingof theArchaeologicalInstituteof America,San Antonio, Texas,December1986) (BAR-IS453), Oxford. Farnell, L. R. 1896-1909. TheCultsof the GreekStates,5 vols., Oxford. FdD = FouillesdeDelphes,Paris IV, i = T. Homolle, Monumentsfigures: Sculpture:Art primitif,artarchaiquedu Peloponneseet des iles, 1909. IV,v = F. Chamoux, Monumentsfigures:Sculpture:L'Aurige, 1955. IV, vi = M.-A. Zagdoun, Monumentsfigures: Sculpture:Reliefs, 1977. Felletti Maj, B. M. 1953. MuseoNazionaleRomano:I Ritratti, Rome. . 1958. Iconografiaromanaimperialeda SeveroAlessandro a M. AurelioCarino(222-285 d.C.) (Quaderni e guide di archeologia 2), Rome. 4: Das TheFiechter, E. 1931. AntikegriechischeTheaterbauten aterin Megalopolis,Stuttgart. . 1936. AntikegriechischeTheaterbauten 7: Das DionysosTheaterin Athen3: Einzelheitenund Baugeschichte, Stuttgart. Gottinnen:Klassische Filges, A. 1997. Standbilderjugendlicher GewandstatuenmitBrustwulstund ihre undfriihhellenistische kaiserzeitliche Rezeption,Cologne. Fink,J. 1964. "Ein Kopf fir Viele," RM71, pp. 152-157. Finsen, H. 1972. Le levedu theatreromaina Bosra,Syrie(Analecta Romana Instituti Danici 6), Copenhagen. Fischer, F. 1934. Nereidenund Okeanidenin Hesiod'sTheogonie, Halle. Fishwick, D. 1978. "The Development of Provincial Ruler Worship in the West,"ANRWII.16.2, pp. 1201-1253. . 1991. TheImperialCultin theLatin West:Studiesin the Ruler Cult of the WesternProvincesof theRomanEmpire2.1 (EPRO108.2), Leiden. Fittschen, K. 1971. "Zuangeblichen Bildnis des Lucius Verus im Thermen-Museum,"JdI86, pp. 214-252. . 1972. "Das Bildprogramm des Trajansbogens zu Benevent," AA, pp. 742-788. . 1977. KatalogderantikenSkulpturenin SchlossErbach (AF3), Berlin. . 1982. "Hinterk6pfe: Uber den wissenschaftlichen Erkenntniswert von Bildnisrfickseiten," in PraestantInterna:Festschrift fur UlrichHausmann zum 65. Geburtstag am 13. August 1982, B. von Freytag gen. Loringhoff et al., eds., Tubingen, pp. 119-124. . 1989. "'Barbaren-K6pfe':Zur Imitation Alexanders d. Gr. in der mittleren Kaiserzeit,"in Walker and Cameron 1989, pp. 108-113. . 1991. "Zur Rekonstruktion griechischer Dichterstatuen 1: Die Statuedes Menander,"AM 106, pp. 243-279. . 1992. "Zum Bildnis eines Romers in Thera," in MOY2JIKOANHP: Festschriftfiir Max Wegnerzum 90. Geburtstag(Antiquitasseries 3, no. 32), 0. Brehm and S. Klie, eds., Bonn, pp. 115-118. . 1999. PrinzenbildnisseantoninischerZeit (Beitrage zur Erschliessung hellenistischer und kaiserzeitlicher Skulptur und Architektur 18), Mainz.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS .2001. "EineWerkstattattischer Portratbildhauer im NeueFunde 2.Jh. n. Chr.,"in Griechenlandin derKaiserzeit: und Forschungenzu Skulptur,Architektur,und Topographie (Kolloquiumzum sechzigstenGeburtstagvon Prof Dietrich Willers,Bern,12-13Juni 1998) (Hefte des archaologischen Seminars der Universitit Bern, Suppl. 4), C. Reusser, ed., Bern, pp. 71-77. Fittschen, K., and P. Zanker. 1983. Katalog der romischen Portrdts in den CapitolinischenMuseen und den anderen kommunalenSammlungenderStadtRomIII:Kaiserinnen-und Prinzessinnenbildnisse 2 vols., Mainz. Frauenportrdts, . 1985. Katalog der romischenPortrdtsin den Capitolinischen Museen und den anderen kommunalen Sammlungen der Stadt Rom I: Kaiser- und Prinzenbildnisse, Mainz. IIMuseoEtruscoe i monumentiantichi, Fiumi, E. 1976. Volterra: Pisa. Flagge, I. 1975. Untersuchungenzur Bedeutung des Greifen, St. Augustin. Flashar, M. 1992. Apollon Kitharodos:StatuarischeTypendes musischenApollon,Cologne. aus Sidon (IstFleischer, R. 1983. Der Klagefrauensarkophag Forsch34), Tubingen. Floren, J. 1977. Studienzur Typologiedes Gorgoneions(Orbis antiquus 29), Miinster. Forbes, R. J. 1964-1972. Studies in Ancient Technology,2nd ed., 9 vols., Leiden. Fougeres, G. 1890. "Fouilles de Mantinee I: Telesphoros," BCH 14, pp. 595-601. Franceschini, M. de. 1991. VillaAdriana:Mosaici,pavimenti, edifici,Rome. Fraser, P. M. 1977. RhodianFuneraryMonuments,Oxford. Freytag gen. Loringhoff, B. von. 1987. "Kerameikos 19831985, 2: Heilige Strasse und Eridanos," AA, pp. 484499. Frezouls, E. 1982. "Aspects de l'histoire architecturale du theatre romain," ANRWII.12.1, pp. 343-441. Friedland, E. A. 1997. "Roman Marble Sculpture from the Levant:The Group from the Sanctuaryof Pan at Caesarea Philippi (Panias)" (diss. University of Michigan). Frisch, P. 1975. Die Inschriftenvon Ilion (Inschriften griechische Stadte aus Kleinasien 3), Bonn. Frothingham, A. L. 1915. "Medusa II: The Vegetation Gorgoneion," AJA19, pp. 13-23. Fuchs, M. 1982. "Eine Musengruppe aus dem PompeiusTheater," RM 89, pp. 69-80. . 1984. "Zueinigen Relieffragmenten aus dem Balbustheater und dem Nachleben des grossen Frieses von Pergamon,"JdI99, pp. 215-255. . 1986. I teatroromanodi Fiesole:Corpusdellesculture, Rome. . 1987. Untersuchungenzur Ausstattungr6mischerThedesImperiumRomanum, aterin Italienund den Westprovinzen Mainz. . 1992. RomischeIdealplastik(Glyptothek Miinchen, Katalog Skulpturen 6), Munich. Fuchs, M., P. Liverani, and P. Santoro. 1989. CaereII:II teatro e il ciclostatuariogiulio-claudio,Rome. Fuchs, W. 1983. Die Skulptur der Griechen,3rd ed., rev., Munich. Furtwangler, A. 1893. Meisterwerkeder griechischenPlastik, Leipzig. 1895. Masterpieces ----. of GreekSculpture:A Seriesof Essays on theHistoryof Art, London. Gabelmann, H. 1968. "Oberitalische Rundaltare," RM 75, pp. 87-105.

XIX

IntroducGalinsky, K. 1996. Augustan Culture:An Interpretive tion, Princeton. Ganshow,T. 1986. "Uberlegungen zum Partherdenkmal von Ephesos," AA, pp. 209-221. Garcia y Bellido, A. 1949. EsculturasromanasdeEspanay Portugal, Madrid. Gardiner, E. N. 1930. Athleticsof theAncient World,Oxford. Gardner, E. A. 1892. Excavationsat Megalopolis:1890-1891, London. Gasparri, C. 1989. "Una officina di copisti in eta medioimperiale," in Walker and Cameron 1989, pp. 96-101. Geagan, D.J. 1968. "Notes on the Agonistic Institutions of Roman Corinth," GRBS9, pp. 69-80. . 1979. "Roman Athens: Some Aspects of Life and Culture I: 86 B.C.-A.D. 267," ANRWII.7.1, pp. 371-437.

. 1989. "The Isthmian Dossier of P. Licinius Priscus Juventianus," Hesperia58, pp. 349-360. Gebhard, E. R. 1973. The Theaterat Isthmia,Chicago. . 1981. "The Theater at Stobi: A Summary,"in Stobi III, pp. 13-27. . 1988. "Rulers' Use of Theaters in the Greek and Roman World," in AthensCongressIV, pp. 65-69. - . 1993. "The Isthmian Games and the Sanctuary of Poseidon in the EarlyEmpire," in Gregory 1993, pp. 7894. . 1996. "The Theater and the City,"in Roman Theater and Society(Papersfrom theFirstE. TogoSalmonConference, Held in 1993 at McMasterUniversity),W.J. Slater, ed., Ann Arbor, pp. 113-127. Geppert, S. 1996. Castorund Pollux: Untersuchungenzu den Darstellungen der Dioskuren in der romischen Kaiserzeit (Charybdis 8), Miinster. Gercke, P. 1968. "Satyrndes Praxiteles"(diss. Otto-FriedrichUniversitit Bamberg). Gercke, W. B. 1968. "Untersuchungen zum r6mischer Kinderportrat von den Anfangen bis in hadrianische Zeit" (diss. Universitit Hamburg). Gergel, R. A. 1994. "Costume as Geographic Indicator: Barbarians and Prisoners on Cuirassed Statue Breastplates," in Sebesta and Bonfante 1994, pp. 191-209. Gerkan, A. von. 1921. Das Theatervon Priene,als Einzelanlage und in seinerBedeutungfiirdas hellenistischeBiihnenwesen, Munich. Gerkan, H. von. 1941. "Die Neronische Scaenae Frons des Dionysostheaters in Athen," JdI 56, pp. 163-177. . 1952. "Zuden Theatern von Segesta und Tyndaris," AndreasRumpf,zum 60. Geburtstagdargebracht in Festschrift von Freunden und Schiilern, Kiln, im Dezember1950, T. Dohrn, ed., Krefeld, pp. 82-92. Gilkes, O. J., ed. 2003. The Theatreat Butrint: Luigi Maria Ugolini'sExcavationsat Butrint, 1928-1932 (BSA Suppl. 35), London. Giuliano, A. 1953-1955. "Ritratto maschile di piccolo formato del III d.C.," BullCom75, pp. 163-165. Giuliano, A., and B. Palma. 1978. La manieraateniesedi eta romana:I maestridei sarcofagiattici (StMisc24), Rome. Gleason, K. 1994. "PorticusPompeiana:A New Perspective on the First Public Park of Ancient Rome," Journal of GardenHistory14, pp. 13-27. Glueck, N. 1937. "A Newly Discovered Nabataean Temple of Atargatis and Hadad at Khirbet et-Tannur, Transjordania," AJA41, pp. 361-376. Gnoli, R. 1988. Marmoraromana,Rome. Goethert, F. W. 1939. "Studien zur Kopienforschung I: Entwicklung der Togastatue in der beiden erstenJahrhunderten der r6mischen Kaiserzeit,"RM54, pp. 176-219.

xx

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

Goette, H. R. 1984. "Coronaspicea, coronacivica und Adler: Bemerkungen zu drei romischen Dreifussbasen," AA, pp. 573-589. . 1985. "Zum Bildnis des 'Cicero,"' RM92, pp. 291318. . 1986. "Antike Skulpturen im Herzog Anton Ulrich Museum, Braunschweig," AA, pp. 711-744. . 1988. "Zwei'fest-datierte' griechische Statuen r6mischer Zeit," AM 103, pp. 251-258. . 1990. Studienzu romischenTogadarstellungen (Beitrage zur Erschliessung hellenistischer und kaiserzeitlicher Skulptur und Architektur 10), Mainz. Goette, H. R., and K. Hitzl. 1987. "Zwei umgearbeitete Portratk6pfe in Olympia," AM 102, pp. 283-293. Gografe, R. 1996. "Strenger Stil oder Klassizismus? Die Bronzestatue des Apollon aus Isriye,"AntW27, pp. 353358. Golda, T. M. 1997. Puteale und verwandteMonumente:Eine Studie zum r6mischenAusstattungsluxus (Beitrage zur Erschliessung hellenistischer und kaiserzeitlicher Skulptur und Architektur 16), Mainz. Goldman, N. 1994a. "Reconstructing Roman Clothing," in Sebesta and Bonfante 1994, pp. 213-237. . 1994b. "Roman Footwear,"in Sebesta and Bonfante 1994, pp. 101-129. Goodlet, V. C. 1991. "Rhodian Sculpture Workshops," AJA 95, pp. 669-681. Graeve, V. von, and E Preusser. 1981. "ZurTechnik griechischer Malerei aufMarmor,"JdI96, pp. 120-156. Granger-Taylor,H. 1987. "The Emperor's Clothes: The Fold Lines," BClevMus74, pp. 114-123. Green, J. R. 1994. Theatrein AncientGreekSociety,London. Greenewalt, C. H.,Jr. 1971. "An Exhibitionist from Sardis," M. A. Hanfmann(Monographs in StudiesPresented to George in Art and Archaeology 2), D. G. Mitten, J. G. Pedley, andJ. A. Scott, eds., Mainz, pp. 29-46. Gregory, T. E., ed. 1993. The Corinthiain the Roman Period (PapersGivenat a SymposiumHeld at TheOhioStateUniversity on 7-9 March1991) (JRASuppl. 8), Ann Arbor. Grenier, J.-C. 1989. "La decoration statuaire du Serapeum du 'Canope' de la Villa Adriana: Essai de reconstitution et d'interpretation," MEFRA101, pp. 925-1019. Grimal, P. 1969. Lesjardins romains,Paris. Gros, P. 1987. "Un programme augusteen: Le centre monumental de la colonie d'Arles,"JdI 102, pp. 339-363. Gross, W. H. 1940. Bildnisse Traians (Das r6mische Herrscherbild pt. 2, vol. 2), Berlin. Gruen, E. S. 1992. Cultureand National Identityin Republican Rome,Ithaca. Gualandi, G. 1976. "Sculture di Rodi," ASAtene, n.s. 38, pp. 7-259. . 1977. "Una testa di Adriano da Hierapolis (Frigia)," --RdA 1, pp. 64-88. Guerrini, L. 1961. "'Las Incantadas' di Salonicco," ArchCl 13, pp. 40-70. . 1974. "Copie romane del tipo Aspasia/Sosandra da Creta," in Antichith cretesi:Studi in onoredi Doro Levi II (Cronache dei archeologia 13), G. Rizza, ed., Catania, pp. 227-234. Habicht, C. 1985. Pausanias' Guideto Ancient Greece(Sather Classical Lectures 50), Berkeley. Hallett, C. H. 1995. "The Replica ofPolykleitos' Doryphoros in the Minneapolis Institute of Arts: An Archaeological Description," in Moon 1995, pp. 116-120. Halm-Tisserant, M. 1986. "Le gorgoneion, embleme d'Athena: Introduction du motif sur le bouclier et l'egide," RA, pp. 245-278.

Hamiaux, M. 1998. Les sculptures grecquesII: La periode hellgnistique(IIIe-IrsieclesavantJ.-C.), Paris. Hamilton, R. 2000. TreasureMap:A Guideto theDelian Inventories,Ann Arbor. Hanfmann, G. M. A. 1979. Rev. of Schwingenstein 1977 and CorinthIX, ii, in ArtB61, pp. 628-630. Hanfmann, G. M. A., andJ. G. Pedley. 1964. "The Statue of Meleager," AntP3, pp. 61-66. Hanfmann, G. M. A., and N. Ramage. 1978. Sculpturefrom Sardis:TheFinds through1975, Cambridge, Mass. Hanlein-Schafer, H. 1985. VeneratioAugusti: Eine Studie zu den Tempelndeserstenromischen Kaisers(Archaeologica 39), Rome. Hannestad, N. 1974. "The Portraits of Aelius Caesar," AnalRom7, pp. 67-100. . 1986. RomanArtand ImperialPolicy(JutlandArchaeological Society Publications 19), P. G. Crabb, trans., Hojbjerg. Harrison, E. B. 1960a. AncientPortraitsfromtheAthenianAgora (AgoraPicBk5), Princeton. . 1960b. "New Sculpture from the Athenian Agora, 1959," Hesperia29, pp. 369-392. . 1967. "The Constantinian Portrait,"DOP21, pp. 7996. . 1977. "The Shoulder-Cord of Themis," in Festschrift U. H6ckmann and A. Krug,eds., Mainz, fiirFrankBrommer, pp.155-161. . 1981. "Motifs of the City-Siege on the Shield of Athena Parthenos," AJA85, pp. 281-317. - . 1982. "TwoPheidian Heads: Nike and Amazon," in TheEyeof Greece:Studiesin theArt of Athens,D. Kurtz and B. Sparkes, eds., Cambridge, pp. 53-88. . 1984. "A Pheidian Head of Aphrodite Ourania," Hesperia53, pp. 379-388. . 1988. "StylePhases in Greek Sculpture from 450 to 370 B.C.," in AthensCongressIII, pp. 99-105. . 1990. "Repair, Reuse, and Reworking of Ancient Greek Sculpture,"in True and Podany 1990, pp. 163-184. . 2000. "Eumolpos Arrives in Eleusis," Hesperia69, pp. 267-291. Hartswick, K. J. 1986. "The So-Called Ephesos Amazon: A New Identification," JdI101, pp. 127-136. -- . 1990. "The Ares Borghese Reconsidered," RA, pp. 227-283. ----. 1995. "Head Types of the Doryphoros," in Moon 1995, pp.161-176. Haskell, P. B. 1980. "Temple E at Corinth: A Re-evaluation" (paper, Boston 1979), abstract in AJA84, pp. 210-211. Hauschild, T. 1990. "Das r6mische Theater von Lissabon: Planaufnahme 1985-1988," MM 31, pp. 348-392. zu denkaiserzeitlichen Have-Nikolaus, F. 1998. Untersuchungen TogastatuengriechischerProvenienz:Kaiserlicheund private TogatiderProvinzenAchaia, Creta(et Cyrene),und Teilender ProvinzMacedonia,Mainz. Studien Heilmeyer, W.-D. 1970. KorinthischeNormalkapitelle: zur Geschichteder romischenArchitekturdekoration (RM-EH 16), Heidelberg. Heintze, H. von. 1962. Rev. of Rosenbaum 1960, in AJA66, pp. 111-113. . 1966. Das Bildnis derSappho,Mainz. 1968a. Die antikenPortritsimSchlossFasaneriebeiFulda, Mainz. 1968b. "Galba,"RM 75, pp. 149-153. -----. Hekler, A. 1940. "Philosophen- und Gelehrtenbildnisse der mittleren Kaiserzeit,"Die Antike16, pp. 115-141. Heller, D., and N. Herz. 1995. "Weathering of Dolomitic Marble and the Role of Oxalates," in TheStudyof Marble

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS and OtherStones Usedin Antiquity(Transactionsof the 3rd InternationalSymposiumof ASMOSIA,Athens, 17-19 May 1993) (ASMOSIA3), Y. Maniatis, N. Herz, and Y.Basiakos, eds., London, pp. 267-276. in AthenII:Die Skulpturen Herbig, R. 1935. Das Dionysos-Theater vomBiihnenhaus(Antike griechische Theaterbauten VI), Stuttgart. . 1949. Pan, der griechischeBocksgott:Versucheiner Monographie,Frankfurt. Herdejiirgen, H. 1993. "Campanische Girlandensarkophage," in GrabeskunstderromischenKaiserzeit(Das vierte vom 23. bis 27. Juli 1990 Symposiumdes Sarkophag-Corpus, in Marburg),G. Koch, ed., Mainz, pp. 43-50. Kallmintz. Hermann, W. 1961. RomischeGotteraltdre, Hermary, A. 1983. "Deux tetes en marbre trouv6es a Amathonte," BCH 107, pp. 289-299. Herrmann,J. 1990. "Thasosand the Ancient Marble Trade," in True and Podany 1990, pp. 73-100. Herrmann, P., and R. Herbig. 1906-1950. Denkmalerder MalereidesAltertums,Munich. Hesberg, H. von. 1978-1980. "ZurDatierung des Theaters in der Domitiansvilla von Castel Gandolfo," RendPontAcc 51-52, pp. 305-324. . 1981-1982. "Elemente der fruihkaiserzeitlichenAedikulaarchitektur," OJh53, pp. 43-86. . 1983. "Zur Datierung der Gefangenenfassade in Korinth: Eine wiederverwendete Architektur augusteischer Zeit," AM 98, pp. 215-238. Heuzey, L. 1884. "Papposilene et le dieu Bes,"BCH8, p. 161. Hicks, E. L. 1887. "Iasos,"JHS8, pp. 83-118. . 1890. TheCollectionofAncientGreekInscriptionsin the BritishMuseumIII, Oxford. Hierapolis:Scavi e ricerche,Rome I = T. Ritti, Fontiletterarie edepigrafiche(Archaeologica 53), 1985. II = F. D'Andria and T. Ritti, Le sculturedel teatro:I rilievi coni ciclidi ApolloeArtemide(Archaeologica 54), 1985. III = G. Bejor, Le statue (Archaeologica 99), 1991. Hiesel, G. 1967. "Samische Steingerate" (diss. Universitat Hamburg). 2nd ed., Berkeley. Higgins, R. 1980. Greekand RomanJewellery, desMetroon Hitzl, K. 1991. Die kaiserzeitliche Statuenausstattung Berlin. (OlForsch19), Hoepfner, W. 1997. "The Architecture of Pergamon," in Pergamon:The TelephosFriezefrom the GreatAltar II (Exhibition, Metropolitan Museum of Art, NewYork, 16January to 14 April 1996; Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, California Palace of the Legion of Honor, 4 May to 8 September 1996), R. Dreyfus and E. Schraudolph, eds., San Francisco, pp. 23-57. Holloway, R. 1985. "The Spolia of the Arch of Constantine," NumAntCl24, pp. 261-273. H6lscher, T. 1971. Ideal und Wirklichkeitin den Bildnissen Alexanderdes Grossen(AbhHeid1971, 2), Heidelberg. . 1974. "Die Nike der Messenier und Naupaktier in Olympia:Kunstund Geschichte im spaten 5.Jahrhundert v. Chr.,"JdI89, pp. 70-111. Hommel, P. 1954. Studienzu den romischeFigurengiebelnder Kaiserzeit,Berlin. Honroth, M. 1971. StadtromischeGirlanden:Ein Versuchzur Entwicklungsgeschichter6mischer Ornamentik (Sonderschriften vom Osterreichischen archaeologische Institut Wien 17), Vienna. Horn, R. 1931. StehendeweiblicheGewandstatuenin der hellenistischenPlastik (RM-EH2), Munich. 1938. "Hellenistische K6pfe II," RM 53, pp. 70-90. ----. Hornbostel, W. 1973. Sarapis: Studien zur Uberlieferungs-

xxi

und WandlungenderGegeschichte,denErscheinungsformen stalt eines Gottes(EPRO32), Leiden. Horsesof San Marco= G. Perocco, ed., TheHorsesof San Marco, Venice(Exhibition, Convento di Santa Apollonia, Venice, Italy), J. and V. Wilton-Ely,trans., London 1979. Howard, R. 1924. "An Athlete Attributed to Myron," BClevMus11, pp. 170-173. Humphrey, J. H. 1986. Roman Circuses:Arenasfor Chariot Racing,London. Imhoof-Blumer, E, and P. Gardner. [1885-1887] 1964. Ancient CoinsIllustratingLostMasterpiecesof GreekArt:A NumismaticCommentary on Pausanias, rev. and enl. by A. N. Oikonomides, Chicago. Inan,J. 1975. RomanSculpturein Side,Ankara. .1978. "Der Bronze Torso im Burdur-Museum aus Bubon und der Bronze Kopf imJ. Paul Getty Museum," IstMitt28, pp. 267-287. Inan,J., N. Atik, A. Oztfirk, H. S. Alanyali, and G. Ates. 2000. "Vorbericht fiber die Untersuchungen an der Fassade des Theaters von Perge," AA, pp. 285-340. Inan,J., and E. Alfoldi-Rosenbaum. 1979. Romischeundfriihaus derTurkei:NeueFunde,2 vols., byzantinischePortrdtplastik Mainz. Inan, J., and E. Rosenbaum. 1966. Roman and EarlyByzantinePortraitSculpturein Asia Minor,London. Isler-Kerenyi, C. 1976. "Die Stiitzfiguren des griechischen Theaters von laitas II,"in Studia letina I, H. Bloesch and H. P. Isler, eds., Zurich, pp. 30-48. Isthmia= Isthmia:Excavationsbythe Universityof Chicagounder theAuspicesof theAmericanSchoolof ClassicalStudiesat Athens, Princeton I = O. Broneer, Templeof Poseidon,1971. II = O. Broneer, Topography and Architecture, 1973. IV = M. C. Sturgeon, SculptureI: 1952-1967, 1987. VI = S. Lattimore, SculptureII:MarbleSculpture,1967-1980, 1996. Jacob-Felsch,M. 1969. DieEntwicklunggriechischerStatuenbasen und dieAufstellungderStatuen,Waldsassen. Jacopi, G. 1939. "Gli scavi della missione archeologica italiana ad Afrodisiade," MonAnt38, pp. 74-202. Jaczynowska, M. 1981. "Le culte de l'Hercule romain au temps du Haut-Empire," ANRWII.17.2, pp. 631-661. Janon, N., M. Janon, and M. Kilmer. 1992. "Les frises d'Orange: Le pouvoir mis en scene," in Landes 1992, pp.149-162. Jeanmaire, H. 1978. Dionysos:Histoire du culte de Bacchus: L'orgiasmedans l'antiquiteet les tempsmodernes,originedu theatreen Grece,orphismeet mystiquedionysiaque,evolution du dionysismeapresAlexandre,repr. of 1951 ed., Paris. Jeppesen, K. K. 1989. "What Did the Maussolleion Look Like?"in Architecture and Societyin HecatomnidCaria(Proceedings of the Uppsala Symposium 1987) (Boreas 17), T. Linders and P. Hellstr6m, eds., Uppsala, pp. 15-22. . 1992. "TotOperumOpus:Ergebnisse der danischen Forschungen zum Maussolleion von Halikarnass seit 1966,"JdI 107, pp. 59-102. Jockey, P. 1998. "Neither School nor Koine:The Local Workshops of Delos and Their Unfinished Sculpture," in Palagia and Coulson 1998, pp. 177-184. Johansen, F. S. 1971. "Ritrattimarmorei e bronzei di Marco Vipsanio Agrippa," AnalRom6, pp. 17-48. . 1994-1995. RomanPortraits:Catalogue,Ny Carlsberg 3 vols., Copenhagen Glyptotek, Johnson, F. P. 1924. "Byzantine Sculptures at Corinth," AJA 28, pp. 253-265. Jones, C. P. 1993. "Greek Drama in the Roman Empire," in Scodel 1993, pp. 39-52.

XXII

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

Jordan, D. R. 1994. "InscribedLead Tablets from the Games in the Sanctuary of Poseidon," Hesperia63, pp. 111-126. and the AIAHANTQN: Jory, E.J. 1967. "A HAIS KQMQiAOZ Some Problems of Festival Competitions," BICS 14, pp. 84-90. . 1986. "Continuity and Change in the Roman Theatre," in Studiesin Honourof T B. L. Webster I,J. H. Betts, J. T. Hooker, andJ. R. Green, eds., Bristol, pp. 143-152. Jucker, H. 1961. Das Bildnis im Bldtterkelch:Geschichteund (Bibliotheca HelvetBedeutungeinerromischenPortrdtform ica Romana 3), 2 vols., Lausanne. . 1981. "Iulische-claudische Kaiser- und Prinzenportrats als 'Palimpseste,"'Jd96, pp. 236-316. . 1982. "R6mische Herrscherbildnisse aus Aegypten," ANRWII.12.2, pp. 667-725. Jucker, H., and D. Willers, eds. 1982. Gesichter:Griechische und rimische Bildnisse aus SchweizerBesitz (Exhibition, Bernischen Historischen Museum, 6 November 1982-6 February 1983), Bern. Kabus-Jahn,R. 1963. "Studien zu Frauenfiguren des vierten Jahrhunderts vor Christus"(diss. Albert-Ludwigs-Universitit Freiburg). Kabus-Preisshofen, R. 1975. "Statuettengruppe aus dem Demeterheiligtum bei Kyparissi auf Kos," AntP 15, pp. 31-64. . 1989. Die hellenistischePlastik derInsel Kos (AM-BH 14), Berlin. Kihler, H. 1948. DergrosseFriesvonPergamon:Untersuchungen zur Kunstgeschichte und Geschichte Pergamons,Berlin. Kane, S. 1985. "'The Kore Who Looks After the Grain': A Copy of the Torlonia-Hierapytna Type in Cyrene," AJA 89, pp. 455-463. . 1988. "Sculpture from Cyrene in Its Mediterranean Context," in Fant 1988, pp. 127-138. Kane, S., and S. Carrier. 1988. "Relationships between Style and Size of Statuary and the Availability of Marble at Trade Technology, Cyrene,"in ClassicalMarble:Geochemistry, (Proceedingsof the NATO AdvancedResearchWorkshopon Marblein Ancient Greeceand Rome:Geology,Quarries,Commerce,Artifacts, II Ciocco,Lucca, Italy, May 9-13, 1988) (ASMOSIA 1), N. Herz and M. Waelkens, eds., Dordrecht, pp. 197-206. Kanta, K. G. 1979. Eleusis:Myth,Mysteries,History,Museum, W. W. Phelps, trans., Athens. Kapossy, B. 1969. Brunnenfiguren der hellenistischen und romischenZeit,Zurich. Karanastassis, P. 1986. "Untersuchungen zur kaiserzeitlichen Plastik in Griechenland I: Kopien, Varianten, und Umbildungen nach Aphrodite-Typen des 5.Jhs. v. Chr.," AM 101, pp. 207-291. . 1987. "Untersuchungen zur kaiserzeitlichen Plastik in Griechenland II: Kopien, Varianten, und Umbildungen nach Athena-Typen des 5. Jhs. v. Chr.,"AM 102, pp. 323-428. Karouzou, S. 1968. Catalogue,Sculpture,NationalArchaeological Museum,H. Wace, trans., Athens. . 1969. "Die Antiken vom Kloster Luku in der Thyreatis," RM 76, pp. 253-265. . 1974. "Neues zur Aphrodite Frejus: Ein attischer Kopfund das Fragment einer Grabstele,"AM89, pp. 151172. Kaschnitzvon Weinberg, G. 1936-1937. Sculturedelmagazzino delMuseoVaticano(Monumenti vaticani di archeologia e d'arte 4), 2 vols., Rome. Katakis,S. 2002. 'E2r'aopxos:Ta yAovrza rzcv pcwacxvXypoov&v aTo r6 k Madscaraxa c~roo 'Aax.rizwmo), iep6 zoV AoTrcdovoq Athens.

Kazianis, D. 1982. ""AyaXicya Tiv Krl-rq Pcoualoxpaacqa&6So (poLai,"AAA 15, pp. 130-142.

Kemp-Lindemann, D. 1975. Darstellungendes Achilleus in griechischerund romischerKunst (Archaologische Studien 3), Bern. Classicismin thePlastic Kiilerich, B. 1993. Late-Fourth-Century Arts:Studiesin theSo-CalledTheodosian Renaissance(Odense University Classical Studies 18), Odense. desprincesJulio-Claudiens au temps Kiss, Z. 1975. L'iconographie d'Augusteet de Tibere,Warsaw. Klein, A. E. 1932. ChildLife in GreekArt, New York. Kleiner, D. E. E. 1983. TheMonumentofPhilopapposin Athens (Archaeologica 30), Rome. . 1992. RomanSculpture,New Haven. Kleiner,F S. 1980. "EarlyRoman Putto-and-GarlandReliefs," BABesch55, pp. 37-49. . 1985. TheArchof Neroin Rome:A Studyof theRoman HonoraryArchbeforeand underNero (Archaeologica 52), Rome. Kleiner, G. 1949. "Das Nachleben des pergamenischen Gigantenkampfes," BWPr109, pp. 3-43. . 1968. Die Ruinen von Milet, Berlin. Klockner, A. 1997. Poseidonund Neptun:ZurRezeptiongriechischerG'tterbilderin derromischenKunst (Saarbriicker Studien zur Archaologie und alten Geschichte 12), Saarbriucken. Knoll, K., et al. 1993. Die Antiken im Albertinum:Staatliche KunstsammlungenDresdenSkulpturensammlung(Zaberns Bildbande zur Archaologie 13), Mainz. Koch, G. 1975a. Die mythologischen Sarkophage: Meleager(ASR XII, 6), Berlin. . 1975b. "Nachlese zu den Meleagersarkophagen," AA, pp. 530-552. Koch, G., and H. Sichtermann. 1982. RomischeSarkophage (HdA), Munich. Koeppel, G. M. 1982a. "The Grand Pictorial Tradition of Roman Historical Representation during the Early Empire," ANRWII.12.2, pp. 507-535. . 1982b. "Official State Reliefs of the City of Rome in the Imperial Age: A Bibliography," ANRW 11.12.1, pp. 477-506. . 1983. "Die historischen Reliefs der r6mischen Kaiserzeit I: Stadtr6mische Denkmaler unbekannter Bauzugeh6rigkeit aus augusteischer und julisch-claudischer Zeit," BJb183, pp. 61-144. . 1986. "Die historischen Reliefs der r6mischen Kaiserzeit IV: Stadtr6mische Denkmaler unbekannter Bauzugeh6rigkeit aus hadrianischer bis konstantinischer Zeit," BJb186, pp. 1-90. . 1987. "Die historischen Reliefs der r6mischen KaiserzeitV: Ara PacisAugustae, Teil 1,"BJb187, pp. 101157. -rv axtTLxcv Kokkorou-Aleura, G. 2001. "ApaoTrlpto6-xy?qs; vv zCoyjzT-qSPcptoiooxpaTxaoc," in ?pyoaCr'pLtovyXuTrc-xCt KarAct'oevoua:MerA6regwrposzTtC v vT 'OAyaxT'dXouA,?reavSpf,A. Alexandri and I. Leventi, eds., Athens, pp.319-348. Kolb, F. 1981. Agoraund Theater:Volks-und Festversammlung, Berlin. Koortbojian, M. 1995. Myth,Meaning, and Memoryon Roman Sarcophagi,Berkeley. Koppel, E. M. 1982. "Teatroromano de Tarragona,Apendice 2: Esculturadel teatro romano de Tarragona,"in Simposio El Teatro,pp. 139-152. Kraft, K. 1951. "Der Helm des r6mischen Kaisers," Wissenin schaftlicheAbhandlungdes deutschenNumismatikertages pp. 47-58. Goittingen,

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS Krahmer, G. 1927. "Die einansichtige Gruppe und die spathellenistische Kunst," Nachrichtender Gesellschaftder zu Gittingen,philologisch-historische Klasse1, Wissenschaften pp. 53-91. Kraus, T. 1967. Das rimische Weltreich(Propylaen Kunstgeschichte 2), Berlin. Kreikenbom, D. 1990. Bildwerkenach Polyklet:Kopienkritische zu den mdnnlichenstatuarischenTypennach Untersuchungen "Hermes,Doryphoros, polykletischenVorbildern: "Diskophoros, Herakles,Diadumenos,Berlin. Krien-Kummrow,G. 1975. "Die Maskenfriese vom Theater in Myra,"in Myra:Eine LykischeMetropolein antikerund byzantinischerZeit (IstForsch30), J. Borchhardt, ed., Berlin, pp. 59-61. Kritsas, Ch. 1979. "Argolidokorinthia," ArchDelt29, B'2 [1973-1974], pp. 212-249. Kron, U. 1977. "Eine Pandion-Statue in Rom, mit einem Exkurs zu Inschriften aufPlinthen,"JdI92, pp. 139-168. Krug, A. 1967. "Binden in der griechischen Kunst: Untersuchungen zur Typologie (6.-1.Jh. v. Chr.)" (diss. Universitat Mainz). Kruse, H.-J. 1975. RomischeweiblicheGewandstatuendeszweiten Jahrhundertsn. Chr.,G6ttingen. Kuhn, G. 1984. "Der Altar der Artemis in Ephesos," AM99, pp. 199-216. Kunckel, H. 1974. Der romischeGenius(RM-EH20), Heidelberg. Kunze, M., et al. 1992. Die Antikensammlungim Pergamonmuseumund in Charlottenburg, Mainz. Kuinzl,E. 1982. "R6mischeKaiserportratsin Gold und Silber: Zur Bedeutung zweier silberner Tetrarchenportrats im R6misch-Germanischen Zentralmuseum Mainz," in RomischesPortrdt,1981 (Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift der Humbolt-UniversitSt zu Berlin 31:2-3), Berlin, pp. 233235. . 1986. Friihhellenistische Gruppen,Cologne. Kuttner, A. 1999. "Culture and History at Pompey's Museum," TAPA129, pp. 343-373. Kyrieleis, H. 1969. Throneund Klinen: Studien zur Formgeschichtealtorientalischer und griechischer Sitz-und Liegemibel vorhellenistischer Zeit(JdI-EH24), Berlin. Lahusen, G. 1978. "Goldene und vergoldete r6mische Ehrenstatuen und Bildnisse," RM 85, pp. 385-395. Lamberton, R., and S. I. Rotroff. 1985. Birdsof theAthenian Agora (AgoraPicBk22), Princeton. Athens. Lambrinoudakis, V. 1971. Mr7poTpacxPr;, Lanckoronski, K. G. 1890-1892. Stiidte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens,2 vols., Vienna. Landels,J. G. 1978. Engineeringin theAncientWorld,London. Landes, C., ed. 1992. SpectaculaII: Le theitre antique et ses Henri (Actesdu colloquetenut la Muskearcheologique spectacles Pradesde Lattes,27-30 April 1989), Lattes. Landwehr, C. 1985. Die antikenGipsabgiisseaus Baiae: Griechin AbgiissenrimischerZeit(AF14), Berlin. ischeBronzestatuen . 1990. "Die Sitzstatue eines bartigen Gottes in Cherchel: Zur Originalitat r6mischer Vatergottdarstellungen," in Andreae et al. 1990, pp. 101-122. . 1993. Die r6mischenSkulpturenvon CaesareaMauretaniae:Denkmaleraus Stein und Bronze1: Idealplastik,weiblicheFigurenbenannt (AF18), Berlin. Langlotz, E. 1965. Ancient GreekSculptureof South Italy and Sicily,A. Hicks, trans., New York. La Regina, A. 1998. MuseoNazionaleRomano:PalazzoMassimo alle Terme,Milan. La Rocca, E. 1972-1973. "Una testa femminile nel Museo Nuovo dei Conservatori e l'Afrodite Louvre-Napoli," ASAtene,n.s. 34-35, pp. 419-450.

XXIII

. 1985. Amazzonomachia: Lesculturefrontonali deltempio di ApolloSosiano (Exhibition, Palazzo dei Conservatori, Rome, 16 April-16June 1985), Rome. Lattimore, S. 1976. TheMarineThiasosin GreekSculpture,Los Angeles. . 1979. "Ares and the Heads of Heroes," AJA 83, pp. 71-78. . 1987. "Skopas and the Pothos," AJA91, pp. 411420. Laurenzi, L. 1932. Monumentidi scultura del Museo archeologicodi RodiIII (ClRhV, 2), Bergamo. . 1955-1956. "Sculture inedite del museo di Coo," ASAtene,n.s. 17-18, pp. 59-156. Lauter, H. 1966. Zur ChronologieriimischerKopien nach Originalendes V Jahrhunderts,Hogl. Lawrence, A. W. 1996. GreekArchitecture,5th ed., New Haven. Lawrence, M. 1965. "The Velletri Sarcophagus," AJA 69, pp. 207-222. Leander Touati, A.-M. 1987. The GreatTrajanicFrieze:The Studyof a Monumentand of theMechanismsofMessageTransmissionin RomanArt, Stockholm. Lechat, H. 1905. Pythagorasde Rhegion (Annales de l'Universit6 de Lyon, n.s. II, 4), Lyon. Lehmann, P. W. 1953. Roman WallPaintingsfrom Boscoreale in theMetropolitan MuseumofArt (Monographs on Archaeology and Fine Arts 5), Cambridge, Mass. delMuseoNazionaledi Napoli, Levi, A. 1926. Le terrecottefigurate Florence. Libertini, G. 1952-1954. "Un gruppo marmoreo da melos del museo di Atene e la scultura equestre romana," ASAtene,n.s. 14-16, pp. 363-381. Linant de Bellefonds, P. 1996. "The Mythological Reliefs from the Agora Gate," in AphrodisiasPapers3, pp. 174186. Lindner, R. 1994. Mythos und Identitait:Studien zur SelbstdarstellungkleinasiatischeStddtein der romischenKaiserzeit (Schriften der wissenschaftlichen Gesellschaft an der Johann Wolfgang Goethe-UniversitatFrankfurtam Main, Geisteswissenschaftliche Reihe 9), Stuttgart. Linfert, A. 1976. KunstzentrenhellenistischerZeit:Studien an weiblichenGewandfiguren, Wiesbaden. G. 1911. von Antikythera,"JdI26, '"Jinglingsstatue Lippold, pp. 271-280. . 1923. Kopien und UmbildungengriechischerStatuen, Munich. . 1933. Rev. of CorinthIX, in Gnomon9, pp. 15-18. . 1936. "Herakliskos,"RM51, pp. 96-103. . 1950. Die griechischePlastik (HdAVI, 3:1), Munich. Lisle, R. 1955. "The Cults of Corinth" (diss. Johns Hopkins University). Liverani, P. 1995. "'Nationes' e 'Civitates' nella propaganda imperiale," RM 102, pp. 219-249. Long, C. R. 1987. The TwelveGodsof Greeceand Rome(EPRO 107), Leiden. L'Orange, H. P. 1933. Studienzur Geschichtedes spitantiken Portrdts,Oslo. . 1947. Apotheosisin AncientPortraiture,Oslo. . 1953. Studieson theIconographyof CosmicKingshipin theAncient World,Oslo. . 1961. "Der Subtile Stil:Eine Kunststr6mung aus der Zeit um 400 nach Christus,"AntK4, pp. 68-75. Lorenz, T. 1972. Polyklet,Wiesbaden. Herme(K6nigsberLullies, R. 1931. Die Typendergriechischen ger kunstgeschichtliche Forschungen 3), K6nigsberg. Lullies, R., and M. Hirmer. 1960. GreekSculpture,M. Bullock, trans., rev. and enl., New York.

XXIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

in ClassicalAntiquity, Lyttelton, M. 1974. BaroqueArchitecture Ithaca. Lyttelton, M., and T. Blagg. 1990. "Sculpture in Nabataean Petra and the Question of Roman Influence," in Architectureand ArchitecturalSculpturein theRomanEmpire(Oxford University Committee for Archaeology, Monograph 29), M. Henig, ed., Oxford, pp. 91-107. Maas, M., andJ. McIntosh Snyder. 1989. StringedInstruments of Ancient Greece,New Haven. MacDonald, W. L. 1986. TheArchitecture of theRomanEmpire II: An UrbanAppraisal,New Haven. Maclsaac,J. D. 1987. "Corinth:Coins, 1925-1926: The Theater District and the Roman Villa," Hesperia56, pp. 97157. MacMullen, R. 2000. Romanizationin the Timeof Augustus, New Haven. Macready, S., and F. H. Thompson, eds. 1987. RomanArchitecturein the GreekWorld(PapersGiven at theEighth in the Societyof Antiquariesof London'sSeriesof One-dayResearch SeminarsHeld on 22nd March1985) (The Society of Antiquaries of London, Occasional Papers 10), London. Maderna, C. 1988. Iuppiter,Diomedes,und Merkurals Vorbilder fur romischeBildnisstatuen:Untersuchungenzum r6mischen statuarischenIdealportrit,Heidelberg. Madigan, B. C. 1991. "A Transposed Head," Hesperia60, pp. 503-510. Magi, F. 1971-1972. "Ancora sulla data dei cavalli di San Marco," RendPontAcc44, pp. 209-217. Magie, D. 1950. RomanRule in Asia Minor: To theEnd of the ThirdCenturyafterChrist,2 vols., Princeton. Mahler, A. 1904. "Tete d'ephebe au Musee du Louvre," RA, n.s. 4, pp. 106-108. Mallwitz,A. 1972. Olympiaund seineBauten, Munich. Manderscheid, H. 1981. Die Skulpturenausstattung der kaiserzeitlichenThermenanlagen(Monumenta artis romanae 15), Berlin. des5. Mangold, M. 1993. Athenatypenaufattischen Weihreliefs und 4. Jhs. v. Chr.(Hefte des Archaologischen Seminars der Universitat Bern, Suppl. 2), Bern. Mansel, A. M. 1956. "Berichtiiber Ausgrabungen und Untersuchungen in Pamphylien in denJahren 1946-1955," AA, cols. 34-119. . 1963. Die Ruinen von Side,Berlin. . 1975. "Die Nymphaeen von Perge," IstMitt 25, pp. 367-372. Marabini Moevs, M. T. 1981. "Le Muse di Ambracia," BdA 66:12, pp. 1-58. Marcad6, J. 1957a. "Sculptures argiennes I," BCH 81, pp. 405-474. . 1957b. Recueildes signaturesde sculpteursgrecs,2nd ed., 2 vols., Paris. . 1963. "Heracles Epitrapezios aAlbe et a Delos," REA 65, pp. 351-358. 1969. Au Museede Ddlos:Etude sur la sculpturehellenistique en ronde bossedecouvertedans l'ile (BEFAR215), Paris. . 1980. "Sculptures argiennes III,"in Etudesargiennes (BCHSuppl. 6), Paris, pp. 133-184. . 1986. "Les sculptures decoratives de la Tholos de Marmaria Delphes: Etat actuel du dossier," in Archaische und klassischegriechischePlastikII (AktendesInternationalen Kolloquiumsvom22.-25. April1985 in Athen),H. Kyrieleis, ed., Mainz, pp. 169-173. Marcade,J., and E. Raftopoulou. 1963. "Sculpturesargiennes II," BCH87, pp. 33-187. Mariani, L. 1907. "Sopra un tipo di Hermes," Ausonia 2, pp. 207-234.

-T6ou Tob'ApXaoMarinatos, S. 1938. "IIaopaptrqaTob150ou HepLXoyLxoD AkeXioo. 'Evda-c xai AextxTY'ApXaLoXoYLtx1 (Kp'n-)," ArchDelt15 [1933-1935], pp. 49-83. (pQpeoa Markman, S. D. 1943. TheHorsein GreekArt, Baltimore. Marquardt, N. 1995. Pan in der hellenistischenund kaiserzeitlichenPlastik (Antiquitasseries 3, no. 33), Bonn. Marvin, M. 1983. "Freestanding Sculptures from the Baths of Caracalla,"AJA87, pp. 347-384. . 1988. "Copying in Roman Sculpture: The Replica Series," Studiesin theHistoryof Art 20, pp. 29-45. Massner, A. K. 1982. Bildnisangleichung:Untersuchungenzur der Augustusportrdts Entstehungs-und Wirkungsgeschichte n. r6mischer v. Chr.-68 Herrscherbild 4), (Das Chr.) (43 Berlin. Mattusch, C. C. 1988. GreekBronzeStatuary:Fromthe Beginnings throughtheFifth CenturyB.C., Ithaca, N.Y. . 1996. The Fire of Hephaistos:Large ClassicalBronzes from North American Collections(Exhibition, Arthur M. Sackler Museum, Harvard University Art Museum, Cambridge, Mass., 20 April- 1 August 1996; Toledo Museum of Art, Toledo, Ohio, 13 October 1996-5 January 1997; Tampa Museum of Art, Tampa, Fla., 2 February-13 April 1997), Cambridge, Mass. Matz, F. 1968-1975. Die dionysischenSarkophage(ASR IV), 4 vols., Berlin. McDonald, W. A. 1943. ThePoliticalMeetingPlacesof theGreeks, Baltimore. Megaw,A. H. W. 1963-1964. "Archaeologyin Greece, 196364," AR, pp. 3-30. Megow, W. R. 1994. "Zwei Kopfe im Rijksmuseum van Oudheden," AntP 23, pp. 59-79. Meiggs, R. 1973. Roman Ostia,2nd ed., Oxford. Melida,J. R. 1915. El teatroromanode Merida,Madrid. Mellink, M. J. 1980. "Archaeology in Asia Minor," AJA84, pp. 501-518. . 1990. "Archaeologyin Anatolia,"AJA94, pp. 125-151. Mendel, G. 1912-1914. Cataloguedes sculpturesgrecques,romaines,et byzantines,3 vols., Istanbul. Berlin. Mercklin, E. von. 1962. AntikeFiguralkapitelle, Meritt,B. D. 1948. "GreekInscriptions,"Hesperia17, pp. 1-53. Merker, G. S. 1973. TheHellenisticSculptureof Rhodes(SIMA 40), G6teborg. dans la ceramiqueattiquedu Metzger, H. 1951. Representations IV siecle(BEFAR172), Paris. sur l'imagerieathenienne(Publications . 1965. Recherches de la Bibliotheque Salomon Reinach 2), Paris. Meyer, H. 1986. "Der Berg Athos als Alexander: Zu den realen Grundlagen der Vision des Deinokrates," RdA10, pp. 22-30. Denkmiler unter . 1991. Antinoos:Die archdologischen MateriEinbeziehungdesnumismatischenund epigraphischen als sowiederliterarischenNachrichten:Ein Beitragzur Kunstderhadrianisch-friihantoninischen und Kulturgeschichte Zeit, Munich. . 1995. "A Roman Masterpiece: The Minneapolis Doryphoros," in Moon 1995, pp. 65-115. Milet= Milet:ErgebnissederAusgrabungenund Untersuchungen seit demJahre1899, Berlin I, vii = H. Knackfuss, Der Sudmarktund die benachbarten Bauanlagen, 1924. VI, ii = P. Herrmann, Inschriftenn. 407-1019, 1998. Milleker, E.J. 1985. "Three Heads of Sarapisfrom Corinth," Hesperia54, pp. 121-135. - . 1986. "The Statue of Apollo Lykeiosin Athens" (diss. New York University). Miller, S. G. 1974. "The Altar of the Six Goddesses in Thessalian Pherai," CSCA7, pp. 231-256.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS Mingazzini, P. 1959. "Tre giochi infantili antichi," RendPontAcc32, pp. 81-92. . 1966. L'insuladi GiasoneMagnoa Cirene(Monografie di archeologia libica 8), Rome. Mitchell, S. 1987. "Imperial Building in the Eastern Roman Provinces," HSCP91, pp. 333-365. . 1990. "Festivals,Games, and Civic Life in Roman Asia Minor,"JRS80, pp. 183-193. Mitchell, S., and M. Waelkens. 1988. "Cremnaand Sagalassus 1987," AnatSt38, pp. 53-65. Mitford, T. B. 1971. TheInscriptionsof Kourion(Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society 83), Philadelphia. Mitropoulou, E. 1984. H -rtroAoyica z,S Oed&Tyca tice(is&, Athens. Moltesen, M. 1995. Greecein theClassicalPeriod:Catalogue,Ny CarlsbergGlyptotek, Copenhagen. Moon, W. G., ed. 1995. Polykleitos,theDoryphoros,and Tradition, Madison. Moore, T. J. 1995. "Seats and Social Status in the Plautine Theater," CJ90, pp. 113-123. Morelli, D. 1959. "I culti in Rodi," Studi classicie orientali8, pp. 94-99. Moreno, P. 1982. "IIFarnese ritrovato ed altri tipi di Eracle in riposo," MEFRA94, pp. 379-526. Moretti, G. 1948. Ara Pacis Augustae,Rome. Moretti, L. 1991. "Dagli Heraia all'Aspis di Argo," Miscellanea grecae romana16, pp. 179-189. Morgan, C. H. 1936. "Excavations at Corinth, 1935-1936," AJA40, pp. 466-484. 1938. "Excavationsat Corinth, Autumn 1937," AJA 42, pp. 362-370. Morrow, K. D. 1985. GreekFootwearand theDating of Sculpture,Madison. Moss, C. F. 1988. "Roman Marble Tables" (diss. Princeton University). MusKos=J. Kritikos, ed., MuseumofKos:ExhibitsList,Athens n.d.

MusNazRom= MuseoNazionaleRomano,Le sculture,Rome I, 1 = A. Giuliano, ed., Sale di esposizione,1979. I, 2 = A. Giuliano, ed., Ali del chiostro,1981. I, 5 = B. Palma and L. de Lachenal, eds., I marmiLudovisi: Storiadella collezioneMuseoNazionale,1983. I, 7:2 = A. Giuliano, ed., Giardinodei cinquecento,1984. I, 8:1, 2 = A. Giuliano, ed., Aule delleTerme,1985. Musso, L. 1987. "Rilievo con pompa trionfale di triano al museo di Palestrina," BdA 72:4, pp. 1-46. Mustilli, D. 1939. Il MuseoMussolini,Rome. Beiwerkan Muthmann, F. 1951. Statuenstiitzenund dekoratives zur und rimischen Bildwerken: Ein Beitrag griechischen Geschichteder romischen Kopistentdtigkeit(AbhHeid 3), Heidelberg. Myres, J. L. 1940-1945. "Excavations in Cyprus," BSA 41, pp. 53-96. Napoli, M. 1954. "Una nuova replica della Sosandra di Calamide," BdA 39, pp. 1-10. Nash, E. 1962. PictorialDictionaryof Ancient RomeII: Lacus luturnae-Volcanal,New York. Naumann, F 1983. Die Ikonographieder Kybelein derphrygischen und der griechischenKunst (IstMitt-BH28),Tiubingen.

Naumann, R., and S. Kantar.1950. "Die Agora von Smyrna," IstForsch17, pp. 102-103. Villen riimischer Neudecker, R. 1988. Die Skulpturen-ausstattung in Italien, Mainz. Neumann, G. 1979. ProblemedesgriechischeWeihreliefs (Tfibinger Studien zur Archaologie und Kunstgeschichte 3), Tiubingen.

xxv

Nicgorski, A. M. 1988. "The Precarious Iconography of Marcus Tullius Cicero" (M.A. thesis, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill). . 1995. "The Iconography of the Herakles Knot and the Herakles-Knot Hairstyles of Apollo and Aphrodite" (diss. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill). Nicosia, F., G. Maetzke, and L. V. Borelli. 1987. Bronzidorati da Cartoceto: Un restauro(Exhibition, Museo Archeologico di Firenze), G. Greco, ed., Florence. Niemeyer, H.-G. 1968. Studien zur statuarischenDarstellung derrimischenKaiser(Monumenta artis romanae 7), Berlin. Nock, A. D. 1930. "E6vvaog; 0es6," HSCP41, pp. 1-62. Norman, N. 1986. "Asklepios and Hygieia and the Cult Statue at Tegea," AJA90, pp. 425-430. Oberleitner, W., ed. 1978. Fundeaus Ephesosund Samothrake, Vienna. zu den mdnnlichenr6mischen Oehler, H. 1961. Untersuchungen MantlestatuenI: Der Schulterbauschtypus, Berlin. OlympiaIII = G. Treu, Die Bildwerkevon Olympiain Stein und Thon (OlympiaIII), Berlin 1897. ?tV &ipXakov Orlandos, A. K. 1955-1956. T&6oitxd8o&EfS Athens. 'E22rvcov, Orr, D. 1972. "Roman Domestic Religion: A Study of the Roman Household Deities and Their Shrines at Pompeii and Herculaneum" (diss. University of Maryland). OstiaV = R. Calza, I ritratti1: Ritrattigrecie romanifinoal 160 circad.C. (OstiaV), Rome 1964. Packard, P. M. 1980. "A Monochrome Mosaic at Isthmia," Hesperia49, pp. 326-346. Packer,J. E. 1997. TheForumof Trajanin Rome:A Studyof the Monuments(California Studies in the History of Art 31), 2 vols., Berkeley. Palagia, 0. 1980. Euphranor(Monumenta graeca et romana 3), Leiden. . 1989. "Seven Pilasters of Herakles from Sparta,"in Walker and Cameron 1989, pp. 122-129. . 1990. "ANew Relief of the Graces and the Charites of Socrates," in Opes Atticae: Miscellanea philologica et historica RaymondoBogaert et Hermanno van Looy oblata (Sacris erudiri 31), M. Geerard, ed., Steenbrugge, pp. 347-356. . 2001. "Sculptures from Roman Sparta," in Kaox2azevua: M?XAT
xxvI

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

. 1993. "The Cartoceto Bronzes: Portraits of a Ro. 1985. Das romischeKaiserbildnisin Staat, Kult, und man Aristocratic Family of the Late First Century B.C.," (Romische Gesellschaft: DargestelltAnhandderSchriftquellen Herrscherbild pt. 3, vol. 5), Berlin. AJA97, pp. 423-446. Pollitt, J.J. 1986. Art of theHellenisticAge, Cambridge. Pensabene, P. 1989. II teatroromanodi Ferento:Architetturae decorazione scultorea(Bibliotheca archaeologica 8), Rome. Potter, D. S. 1999. "Entertainers in the Roman Empire," in Perdrizet, P. 1911. Bronzesgrecsd 'Egyptede la collectionFouquet, Life, Death, and Entertainmentin the RomanEmpire,D. S. Potter and D.J. Mattingly,eds., Ann Arbor, pp. 256-325. Paris. . 1921. Les terrescuitesgrecquesd'Egyptede la collection Pouilloux,J. 1959. "Inscriptions,topographie, et monuments de Thasos," REA61, pp. 273-299. Fouquet,Paris. Poulsen, F. 1951. Catalogue of Ancient Sculpturein the Ny Perret, L. 1929. La titulatureimpriale d'Hadrien,Paris. Pesce, G. 1941. I Rilievi dell'anfiteatrocampano (Studi e Copenhagen. CarlsbergGlyptotek, materiali del museo dell'impero romano 2), Rome. Poulsen, V. 1940. "Myron:Ein stilkritischer Versuch," ActaArch11, pp. 1-42. Peschlow-Bindokat, A. 1972. "Demeter und Persephone in . 1962. Les portraitsromainsI: Republiqueet dynastie der attischen Kunst des 6. bis 4. Jahrhunderts," JdI 87, Julienne (Publications de la Glyptotheque Ny Carlsberg pp. 60-157. xa [jivri%eLa vwioovAiyaWou: 7), H. Laurent-Lund, trans., Copenhagen. Petrakos, V. 1969. "'ApXaLo6T-rTgs . 1974. Les portraitsromainsII: De Vespasien&la basseArchDelt22, B'2 [1967], pp. 445-462. MoucLXvwr," Pfanner, M. 1989. "Uber das Herstellen von Portrats:Ein Beiantiquite(Publications de la Glyptotheque Ny Carlsberg 8), G. Merad, trans., Copenhagen. trag zu Rationalisierungsmassnahmen und Produktionsmechanismen von Massenware im spaten Hellenismus Price, M.J., and B. L. Trell. 1977. Coinsand TheirCities:Architectureon theAncientCoinsof Greece,Rome,and Palestine, und in der romischen Kaiserzeit,"JdI104, pp. 157-257. London. Roman Theatre at F. Ancient H. 1931. "The Pfeiffer, Dugga," Price, S. R. F. 1984. Rituals and Power:The Roman Imperial MAAR9, pp. 145-156. Cult in Asia Minor,Cambridge. Pfuhl-Mobius = E. Pfuhl and H. M6bius, Die ostgriechischen zurkaiserzeitlichen Bauornamentik 2 vols., Mainz 1977-1979. Puilz,S. 1989. Untersuchungen Grabreliefs, von A. 1921. AeXr'iou 35), (IstMitt-BH 'ApXatoXoylxo, Tubingen. "flnapapTrua Didyma Philadelpheus, 1918. E7psTCpo(7i6g;xal via Tcpoox-rqiiaTca ZOUMooUCioU Radt, W. 1988. Pergamon:Geschichteund Bauten, Funde und ArchDelt4 [1918], pp. 1-9. ErforschungeinerantikenMetropole,Cologne. KopLvoou," in Gustave C. 1932. Raeder, J. 1978. "Eine klassizistische Frauenfigur in Rom: Picard, "DionysosMitrephoros," Melanges Zur Arbeitsweise klassizistischer Kiinstler des 1. JahrGlotzII, Paris, pp. 707-721. hunderts v. Chr. und der mittleren Kaiserzeit,"JdI 93, . 1935-1963. Manueld'archeologie grecque:La sculpture, 4 vols., Paris. pp. 252-276. - . 1983. Die statuarischeAusstattungder Villa Hadriana . 1937. "Les sculptures nabateennes de Khirbet-etbei Tivoli,Frankfurt. Tannouret l'Hadad de Pouzzoles,"RA,n.s. 10, pp. 244-249. aro Picard, C., and P. de la Coste-Messeliere. 1927. Sculptures Raftopoulou, E. G. 1980. "Euoo?TloqOpauotarcovxcpraX]ig in TZr,A~: zic du les documents LXXI de Tdyos Mouaeso," 'EOvlx6 pVYl7v 'ApxaLoXoytx6 planchesd'apres grecques Delphes, MuseedeDelphes,Paris. NtxoAo,ooKovzo,covzoS, N. Zapheiropoulos et al., eds., Athens, pp. 388-393. Pickard-Cambridge, A. W. 1946. The Theatreof Dionysosin . 2000. Figuresenfantinesdu Museenational d'Athenes, Athens,Oxford. . 1988. Dramatic Festivals of Athens, 2nd ed., rev., Departementdessculptures,Munich. Rawson, E. 1987. "DiscriminaOrdinum:The LexJulia TheaJ. Gould and D. M. Lewis, eds., Oxford. und die von Priene Archelaos des tralis,"BSR55, pp. 83-114. Das Pinkwart, D. 1965. Relief "MusendesPhiliskos,"Kallmunz. Reden, S. von. 1995. Exchangein Ancient Greece,London. Rehak, P. 1998. "Unfinished Hair and the Installation of Pleket, H. W. 1965. "AnAspect of the Emperor Cult: Impethe Pedimental Sculptures of the Temple of Zeus at Olymrial Mysteries,"HThR 58, pp. 331-347. AntK "Eine zweiter Basler E. 1972. Pochmarski, pp. 193-208. pia," in ZTEXPANOZ, Dionysos," de la statuairegrecqueet roReinach, S. 1897-1930. Repertoire 15, pp. 73-75. . 1974. Das Bild des Dionysos in der Rundplastik der maine,6 vols., Paris. klassischenZeitGriechenlands(Dissertationen der UniverReinhold, M. 1969. "On Status Symbols in the Ancient sitit Graz 26), Vienna. World," CJ64, pp. 300-304. . 1985. "Ein Gruppenfragment im DAI Rome," RM Retzleff, A. G. 2001. "Theaters of the Near East in the Roman and Early Byzantine Period" (diss. University of 92, pp. 235-243. North Carolina, Chapel Hill). . 1988. "Zwei etruskische Klappspiegelreliefs mit P. 1960. Studien zur Polychromieder Plastik 487-499. Reutersward, AA, pp. dionysischer Gruppe," iiberdieFarbwirkung und Rom:Untersuchungen Griechenland . 1990. DionysischeGruppen:Eine typologischeUnterUniversitatis und Marmorder Vienna. des zur Geschichte (Acta Stiitzmotivs, Bronzeskulpturen suchung Stockholmiensis 2; Stockholm Studies in History of Art Polacco, L. 1955. Il voltodi Tiberio:Saggiodi criticaiconografica 3.1), Stockholm. (Accademia patavina di scienze, lettere, e arte, Memorie LXVII [1954-55]), Rome. Reynolds, J. 1982. Aphrodisiasand Rome:Documentsfrom the Excavationof the Theatreat AphrodisiasConductedbyProfesPolacco, L., and C. Anti. 1981. Il teatroantico di Siracusa (I sor Kenan T Erim, Togetherwith SomeRelated Texts(JRS Monumenti dell'arte classica 1), 2 vols., Rimini. London. and in Greek Birds 1977. Life Monograph 1), London. Pollard, J. Myth, . 1991. "Epigraphic Evidence for the Construction --Pollini,J. 1984. "DamnatioMemoriaein Stone: Two Portraits of the Theatre: 1st c. B.C.to Mid-3rdc. A.D.,"in Aphrodisias of Nero Recut to Vespasian in American Museums," AJA Papers2, pp. 15-28. 88, pp. 547-555. yAurrr -rouEOMvxo6 . 1987. ThePortraitureof Gaius and Lucius Caesar,New ---Rhomiopoulou, K. 1997. EXYTvopOcoicxda York. Apxa,o/Aoylxo6Movoaeoo,Athens.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS Ricard, R. 1923. Marbresantiquesdu Museedu Prado.dMadrid (Bibliotheque de l'Ecole des hautes etudes hispaniques 7), Bordeaux. Riccardi, L. A. 2000. "Uncanonical Imperial Portraits in the Eastern Roman Provinces:The Case of the Kanellopoulos Emperor," Hesperia69, pp. 105-132. Richardson, L.,jr. 1988. Pompeii:An Architectural History,Baltimore. . 1992. A New Topographical DictionaryofAncientRome, Baltimore. Richardson, R. B. 1897a. "Report of the Director, 18961897," AJA1, pp. 107-116. . 1897b. "The Excavations at Corinth in 1896," AJA 1, pp. 455-480. . 1902. "Report of the Director, 1901-1902," AJA6, Suppl., pp. 15-23. . 1903. "Head of a Youth from Corinth," AM 28, pp. 451-460. . 1904. "Archaeological News," AJA8, p. 357. Richmond, I. A. 1930. "The FirstYearsof Emerita Augusta," ArchJ87, pp. 98-116. Richter, G. M. A. 1930. Animals in GreekSculpture:A Survey, Oxford. . 1948. RomanPortraits,rev. ed. of two picture books issued in 1941, New York. . 1954. Catalogueof GreekSculptures,MetropolitanMuseum of Art, Cambridge, Mass. . 1965. ThePortraitsof the Greeks,3 vols., London. . 1966. TheFurnitureof the Greeks,Etruscans,and Romans, London. . 1970. Sculptureand Sculptorsof the Greeks,4th ed., rev., New Haven. Ridgway, B. S. 1970. The Severe Style in GreekSculpture, Princeton. . 1972. Classical Sculpture(Catalogueof the Classical Collection,RhodeIsland Schoolof Design, Museum of Art), Providence, R.I. - . 1974. "AStory of Five Amazons," AJA78, pp. 1-17. . 1977. "APeplophoros in Corinth," Hesperia46, pp. 315-323. Princeton. . 1981a. FifthCenturyStylesin GreekSculpture, . 1981b. "Sculpture from Corinth," Hesperia50, pp. 422-448. .1982. "OfKouroi and Korai,Attic Variety,"in Thompson Studies,pp. 118-127. . 1984. Roman Copiesof GreekSculpture:TheProblemof the Originals(Jerome Lectures 15th ser.), Ann Arbor. . 1989. "Laokoon and the Foundation of Rome,"JRA ---2, pp. 171-181. . 1990a. HellenisticSculptureI: TheStylesof ca. 331-200 B.C.,Madison.

. 1990b. "MetalAttachments in Greek Marble Sculpture," in True and Podany 1990, pp. 185-206. . 1993a. TheArchaicStylein GreekSculpture,2nd ed., rev., Chicago. . 1993b. "Response,"in Bulloch et al. 1993, pp. 231241. . 1995. "Paenead exemplum: Polykleitos' Other Works," in Moon 1995, pp. 177-199. . 1997. Fourth-Century Stylesin GreekSculpture,Madison. . 1999. Prayersin Stone:GreekArchitecturalSculptureca. 600-100 B.C.E. (Sather Classical Lectures 63), Berkeley. Rieche, A. 1978. "Die Kopien der 'Leda des Timotheos,"' AntP 17, pp. 21-55. II: Die Skulpturenvon 5. JahrRiemann, H. 1940. Kerameikos hundertbis in romischeZeit,Berlin.

XXVII

Riis, P. J. 1974. "A Colossal Athenian Pan," ActaArch65, pp.124-133. Rizakis,A. D. 1995. AchaieI:Sourcestextuelleset histoireregionale 20), Athens. (MeXettxa-rxoc . 1998. AchaieII: La citedePatras:Epigraphieet histoire (MErsXeztxaa 25), Athens. Rizzo, G. E. 1923. II teatrogrecodi Syracusa,Milan. . 1932. Prassitele,Milan. Roaf, M. 1983. Sculpturesand Sculptorsat Persepolis(Iran 21), London. . 1990. "Sculptors and Designers at Persepolis," in InvestigatingArtisticEnvironmentsin theAncientNearEast (Essays Presentedat a SymposiumHeld in April 1988 at the Arthur M. Sackler Gallery, Smithsonian Institution), A. C. Gunter, ed., Washington, D.C., pp. 105-114. Robert, L. 1946. "Surune inscription agonistique de Thespies," HellenicaII, pp. 5-14. . 1960. "Recherches 6pigraphiques,"REA62, pp. 276361. . 1966. Rev.of CorinthVIII,iii, in REG79, pp. 733-770. Robertson, M. 1975. A Historyof Greek Art,2 vols., Cambridge. . 1992. "Europa and Others: Nostalgia in Late Fifth Century Athenian Vase Painting," in Kotinos:Festschrift fiirErika Simon,H. Froning, T. H6lscher, and H. Mielsch, eds., Mainz, pp. 237-240. Robinson, D. M. 1926. "Roman Sculptures from Colonia Caesaria (Pisidian Antioch)," ArtB9, pp. 5-69. Robinson, H. R. 1975. TheArmourofImperialRome,NewYork. Robinson, H. S. 1962. "Excavations at Corinth, 1960," Hesperia31, pp. 95-133. .1969. "Chiron at Corinth," AJA73, pp. 193-197. Robinson, H. S., and S. S. Weinberg. 1960. "Excavationsat Corinth, 1959," Hesperia29, pp. 225-253. Rockwell, P. 1990. "Finish and Unfinish in the Carving of the Sebasteion," in AphrodisiasPapers1, pp. 101-118. . 1991. "Unfinished StatuaryAssociated with a Sculptor's Studio," in AphrodisiasPapers2, pp. 127-143. Rodenwaldt, G. 1927. Die Kunst derAntike:Hellas und Rom, Berlin. . 1938. "Sarkophag-miscellen,"AA, cols. 386-420. Rogers, G. 1991. SacredIdentityof Ephesos:FoundationMyths of a Roman City,London. 1: Achillund Hippolytos Rogge, S. 1995. Die attischenSarkophage (ASRIX, 1), Berlin. Rolley, C. 1999. La sculpturegrecque2:La periodeclassique(Les manuels d'art et d'arch6ologie antiques), Paris. Romano, I. B. 1994. "A Hellenistic Deposit from Corinth: Evidence for Interim Period Activity (146-44 B.c.)," Hesperia63, pp. 57-104. Romeo, I., and E. C. Portale. 1998. GortynaIII: Le sculture (Monografie della Scuola archeologica di Atene e delle Missioni Italiane in Oriente 8), Padua. Roques de Maumont, H. von. 1958. AntikeReiterstandbilder, Berlin. Ros, K. E. 1996. "The Roman Theater at Carthage,"AJA100, pp. 449-489. Rose, C. B. 1994. "The 1993 Post-Bronze Age Excavations at Troia," Studia Troica4, pp. 75-104. and ImperialPortrai. 1997a. DynasticCommemoration turein theJulio-ClaudianPeriod,Cambridge. . 1997b. "The Imperial Image in the Eastern Mediterranean," in TheEarlyRomanEmpirein theEast (Oxbow Monograph 95), S. E. Alcock, ed., Oxford, pp. 108-120. Rose, H. J. 1958. Handbookof GreekMythology,Including Its Extensionto Rome,6th ed., New York. Rosenbaum, E. 1960. A Catalogueof CyrenaicanPortraitSculpture,London.

XXVIII

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

. 1971. Rev.ofVermeule 1968, in Phoenix25, pp. 179186. Rossetto, P. C., and G. P. Sartorio, eds. 1995. Teatrigreci e Censimento romani alle origini del linguaggio rappresentato: analitico, 3 vols., Turin. Rotili, M. 1972. L'arcodi Traianoa Benevento,Rome. Roueche, C. 1991. "Inscriptions and the Later History of the Theatre," in AphrodisiasPapers2, pp. 99-108. Ruesch, A. 1908. GuidaillustratadelMuseoNazionaledi Napoli, Naples. Riihfel, H. 1984. Das Kind in dergriechischenKunst: Vonder minoisch-mykenischenZeit bis zum Hellenismus (Kulturgeschichte der antiken Welt 18), Mainz. Rumpf, A. 1939. Die Meerwesenaufden antikenSarkophagreliefs (ASRV, 1), Berlin. Rumscheid,J. 2000. Kranzund Krone:ZuInsignienSiegespreisen und Ehrenzeichender r6mischenKaiserzeit(IstForsch43), Tibingen. Risch, A. 1969. "Daskaiserzeitliche Portratin Macedonien," Jd184, pp. 68-196. Ryberg, I. S. 1955. Rites of the State Religion in Roman Art (MAAR22), Rome. MonumenSahin, M. C. 1972. Die Entwicklungdergriechischen Bonn. talaltdre, Saltzmann, D. 1991. "Mosaikenund Pavimente in Pergamon: Vorbericht der Kampagnen 1989 und 1990,"AA,pp. 433456. Salviat, F. 1979. "Vedettesde la scene en province: Signification et date des monuments chor6giques de Thasos," in Thasiaca (BCHSuppl. 5), Paris, pp. 155-167. Salzmann, D. 1982. Untersuchungenzu den antiken Kieselmosaiken:VondenAnfingen biszumBeginnderTesseratechnik (AF 10), Berlin. SamosXII = R. Horn, HellenistischeBildwerkeaufSamos (Samos XII), Bonn 1972. Sanders, I. F. 1982. RomanCrete:An Archaeological Surveyand Gazetteer ofLateHellenistic,Roman,andEarlyByzantineCrete, Warminster. Sanders,J. M. 1993. "The Dioscuri in Post-ClassicalSparta," in SculpturefromArcadiaand Laconia (Proceedings of an InHeld at theAmericanSchoolof ClassiternationalConference cal Studies at Athens,April 10-14, 1992) (Oxbow Monograph 30), 0. Palagia and W. Coulson, eds., Oxford, pp.217-224. Saria, B. 1938. "Das Theater von Stobi," AA, cols. 81-148. Sasel Kos, M. 1978. "ALatin Epitaph of a Roman Legionary from Corinth,"JRS 68, pp. 22-25. Saverkina, I. I. 1979. RomischeSarkophagein derErmitage,Berlin. Schifer,J. 1968. "Der Poseidon von Melos," AntP8, pp. 5567. Schafer, T. 1979. "Zum Schlachtsarkophag Borghese," MEFRA91, pp. 355-382. - . 1989. Imperii Insignia: Sella Curulis undFasces: Zur ReprdsentationromischerMagistrate(RM-EH29), Mainz. Schaller-Harl, G. 1973. "Stiitzfiguren in der griechischen Kunst" (diss. Universitat Wien). Schauenburg, K. 1955. Helios: Archiologisch-mythologische Studieniiberden antikenSonnengott,Berlin. . 1963. "Athletenbilder des vierten Jahrhunderts v. Chr.,"AntP2, pp. 75-81. Schefold, K. 1952. "Der Basler Dionysos," OJh39, pp. 93101. Schiffler, B. 1976. Die Typologiedes Kentaurenin der antiken Kunst: Vom10. bis zum Ende d. 4. Jhs. v. Chr.(Archaologische Studien 4), Frankfurt. Schi0ler, T., andJ. A. Garcia-Diego. 1990. "Bronze Roman

Piston Pumps,"in AncientTechnology (Proceedings of theSymposiumHeld at theFinnish Instituteat Athens,30 Marchto 4 April 1987) (Tekniikan Museonjulkaisuja 5), P. Castren, ed., Helsinki, pp. 46-67. Schmidt, E. M. 1966. "Der Kasseler Apollon und seine Repliken," AntP5, pp. 1-40. . 1982. Geschichte FunktionundBedeutung derKaryatide: der menschlichenTrdger-und Stiitzfigur in der Baukunst (Beitrage zur Archaologie 13), Wiirzburg. Schmidt, I. 1995. HellenistischeStatuenbasen(Archaologische Studien 9), Frankfurt. Schmidt-Colinet, A. 1977. AntikeStiitzfiguren:Untersuchungen zu Typusund Bedeutungder menschengestaltigen Architekturstiitzein dergriechischen und romischenKunst,Frankfurt. - . 1985. "Skulpturen aus dem Nymphaum von Apamea/Syrien: Alte und neue Funde," AA, pp. 119-133. Schneider, C. 1999. Die Musengruppevon Milet (Milesische Forschungen1), Mainz. aus Schneider, R. M. 1986. BunteBarbaren:Orientalenstatuen farbigem Marmor in der r6mischenReprdsentationskunst, Worms. Scholz, B. I. 1992. Untersuchungenzur Trachtder romischen Matrona,Cologne. Schrader, H. 1939. Die archaischen Marmorbildwerkeder Akropolis,2 vols., Frankfurt. Schr6der, S. F. 1989. RomischeBacchusbilderin der Tradition des Apollon Lykeios: Studien zur Bildformulierung und Zeit (ArchaeoBildbedeutungin spdthellenistisch-r6mischer logica 77), Rome. Schweitzer, B. 1948. Die Bildniskunstder romischenRepublik, Leipzig. Schwingenstein, C. 1977. Die Figurenausstattungdes griechischen Theatergebdudes (Mfinchener archaologische Studien 8), Munich. Scodel, R., ed. 1993. Theaterand Societyin the ClassicalWorld, Ann Arbor. Scott, K. 1931. "The Significance of Statues in Precious Metals in Emperor Worship," TAPA62, pp. 101-123. Scrinari, V. Santa Maria. 1972. Catalogodellescultureromane, deAquileia,Rome. MuseoArcheologico Sear, F B. 1990. "The Theatre at Leptis Magna and the Development of Roman Theatre Design," JRA 3, pp. 376383. Sebesta,J. L. 1994a. "Symbolismin the Costume of the Roman Woman," in Sebesta and Bonfante 1994, pp. 46-53. . 1994b. "TunicaRalla, TunicaSpissa:The Colors and Textiles of Roman Costume," in Sebesta and Bonfante 1994, pp. 65-76. Sebesta, J. L., and L. Bonfante, eds. 1994. The Worldof Roman Costume,Madison. Mainz in RomisSelzer, W., ed. 1988. RomischeSteindenkmaler: cherZeit:Katalogzur Sammlungin derSteinhalle,Mainz. Serwint, N. 1993. "The Female Athletic Costume at the Heraia and Prenuptial Initiation Rites,"AJA97, pp. 403-422. Shear, T. L. 1925. "Excavationsat Corinth in 1925," AJA29, pp. 381-397. . 1926. "Excavations in the Theatre District of Corinth," AJA30, pp. 444-463. . 1928a. "Color at Corinth," AJA32, pp. 330-332. .1928b. "Excavations in the Theatre District and Tombs of Corinth in 1928," AJA32, pp. 474-495. . 1929. "Excavations in the Theatre District and Tombs at Corinth in 1929," AJA33, pp. 515-546. ---. 1930. "Excavationsin the North Cemetery at Corinth in 1930," AJA34, pp. 403-431. - . 1931a. "A Hoard of Coins Found in the Theatre District of Corinth in 1930," AJA35, pp. 139-151.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS . 1931b. "The Excavation of Roman Chamber Tombs at Corinth in 1931," AJA35, pp. 424-441. . 1933. "The American Excavations in the Athenian Agora, Second Report: The Sculpture," Hesperia 2, pp.514-541. . 1935. "The American Excavations in the Athenian Agora, Seventh Report: The Sculpture Found in 1933," Hesperia4, pp. 371-420. Shear, T. L.,Jr. 1971. "The Athenian Agora: Excavations of 1970," Hesperia40, pp. 241-279. . 1981. "Athens:From City-Stateto Provincial Town," Hesperia50, pp. 356-377. Sichtermann, H. 1957. "Zur Achill- und Chiron-Gruppe," RM 64, pp. 98-110. . 1959. "Archaologische Funde und Forschungen in der Kyrenaika, 1942 bis 1958," AA, cols. 239-348. Sifakis, G. M. 1967. Studiesin theHistoryof HellenisticDrama, London. Simon, E. 1957. "Beobachtungen zum Apollon Philesios des Kanachos," in Charites:Studien zur Altertumswissenschaft (fiiErnst Langlotz),K. Schauenburg, ed., Bonn, pp. 38-45. . 1967. Ara Pacis Augustae,Tfibingen. 1968. "ZurBedeutung des Greifen in der Kunst der Kaiserzeit,"Latomus21, pp. 749-780. . 1969. Die Gotterder Griechen,Munich. SimposioEl Teatro= Actas delSimposio"ElTeatroen la Hispania Romana,"Merida, 13-15 de noviembrede 1980 (Coloquios cientaificos de la Instituciaon Cultural Pedro de Valencia), Badajoz 1982. Marmorurnen(Beitrage zur ErschSinn, F. 1987. Stadtrimische liessung hellenistischer und kaiserzeitlicherSkulpturund Architektur 8), Mainz. Slane, K. W. 1994. "TetrarchicRecovery in Corinth: Pottery, Lamps, and Other Finds from the Peribolos of Apollo," Hesperia63, pp. 127-168. Smith, A. H. 1892-1904. A Catalogueof Sculpturein the Departmentof Greekand RomanAntiquities,BritishMuseum,3 vols., London. Smith, D. E. 1977. "The Egyptian Cults at Corinth," HThR 70, pp. 200-231. Smith, R. R. R. 1987. "The Imperial Reliefs from the Sebasteion at Aphrodisias,"JRS 77, pp. 88-138. - . 1988a. HellenisticRoyalPortraits,Oxford. . 988b. "Simulacra Gentium:The Ethne from the Sebasteion at Aphrodisias,"JRS 78, pp. 50-77. . 1990a. "Late Roman Philosopher Portraits from Aphrodisias,"JRS80, pp. 127-155. . 1990b. "Myth and Allegory in the Sebasteion," in AphrodisiasPapers1, pp. 89-100. . 1991. HellenisticSculpture:A Handbook,New York. . 1996. "Archaeological Research at Aphrodisias, 1989-1992, A: The Campaigns of 1989 and 1990," in AphrodisiasPapers3, pp. 10-72. . 1997. "The Public Image of Licinius I: PortraitSculpture and Imperial Ideology in the EarlyFourth Century," JRS 87, pp. 170-202. . 1998. "CulturalChoice and Political Identity in Honorific Portrait Statues in the Greek East in the Second Century

A.D.,"JRS

88, pp. 56-93.

. 1999. "Late Antique Portraits in a Public Context: Honorific StatuaryatAphrodisias in Caria,A.D.300-600," JRS 89, pp. 155-189. Sobel, H. 1990. Hygieia:Die GottinderGesundheit,Darmstadt. Sokolovska, V. 1981. "Stobi in the Light of Ancient Sculpture," in StobiIII, pp. 95-106. Soldner, M. 1986. Untersuchungenzu liegendenErotenin der hellenistischenund romischenKunst, 2 vols., Frankfurt.

XXIX

Soles, M. E. C. 1976. "Aphrodite at Corinth: A Study of the Sculptural Types" (diss. Yale University). Spaeth, B. S. 1996. TheRoman GoddessCeres,Austin. Spawforth, A.J. S. 1994. "Corinth, Argos, and the Imperial Cult:Pseudo-Julian,Letters198,"Hesperia63, pp. 211-232. Speier, H. 1932. "Zweifiguren-gruppen im fiinften und viertenJahrhundert vor Christus,"RM47, pp. 1-94. Sperti, L. 1988. Rilievi greci e romani del Museo Archeologico di Venezia(Collezioni e Musei Archeologici del Veneto 32), Rome. Squarciapino, M. F. 1943. La scuola di Afrodisia,Rome. . 1966. LeptisMagna (Ruinenstadte Nordafrikas 2), Basel. Stavridi, A. 1985. "R6mische Portrats im Archaologischen Museum von Chania," Boreas8, pp. 105-110. or orqXrxoO Stefanidou-Tiveriou, T. 1977. "napaTrpqrioti; xuvrlyobcfgKopiv0oo,"ArchEph,pp. 23-28. . 1979. Neoar-txd: Oi dvovayAvpoLt rvaxcESaro6z6 ?AtEdiv IOOFItEpati,Athens. . 1985. Tpa7roEopopazoo Mooacioo Ocaaaorovixr;, Thessaloniki. 1988a. "Po0aitxa Tpasrco(popa: I apawripqoaEl oTo in AthensCongressIII, pp. 252-256. x-cutx6 ipyaor ptLo," . 1988b. "Doppelbild eines eingehiillten Pan," in Kanon: FestschriftErnst Bergerzum 60. Geburtstagam 26. Februar1988 gewidmet(AntK-BH15), M. Schmidt, ed., vol. 1, Basel, pp. 262-268. . 1990. "TcaaXyacxraTroc Mouo6v octo6To coesio qS

OE)?oaXovix-g," Egnatia 2, pp. 73-122. Harc x ?xerAcxaortx axxdaonL7av: . 1993. Tpanocrpo6pac oudSca,Athens. . 1995. "EcXhlv6; xca0O6cov,"ArchEph,pp. 67-75. ----

. 1998. "O 7citpLvog 'A-cXaca7r6 rqvtapXaia Ayopc TqS

in Palagiaand Coulson 1998, pp. 227-233. 0()ooraXovixYg," Heraklion. Stefanis, I. E. 1988. Atovuvaoxo.TcxvrWCat, Stemmer, K. 1978. Untersuchungenzur Typologie:Chronologie und IkonographiederPanzerstatuen(AF4), Berlin. Stenico, A. 1963. Romanand EtruscanPainting, New York. STEPANOS = K. J. Hartswick and M. C. Sturgeon, eds., ZTEPANOS:Studiesin HonorofBrunildeSismondoRidgway (UniversityMuseum Monograph 100), Philadelphia 1998. und Steuben, H. von. 1973. DerKanondesPolyklet:Doryphoros Amazone,Tiibingen. .1975. "Die Madchenstatue Berlin/Rom/Benevent," AntP 15, pp. 23-29. . 1990. "Der Doryphoros," in Polyklet:Der Bildhauer Klassik(Exhibition, Liebieghaus, Museum dergriechischen alter Plastik, Frankfurt am Main, 17 October 1990 to 20 January 1991), H. Beck, P. C. Bol, and H. Buickling,eds., Mainz, pp. 185-198. Stewart, A. F. 1977. Skopasof Paros,Park Ridge, NJ. . 1979. Attika:Studiesin AthenianSculptureof theHellenisticAge, London. . 1982. "Dionysos at Delphi: The Pediments of the Sixth Temple of Apollo and Religious Reform in the Age of Alexander," in Macedoniaand Greecein Late Classical and HellenisticTimes(Studies in the History of Art 10), B. Barr-Sharrarand E. Borza, eds., Washington, D.C., pp.205-227. . 1990. GreekSculpture:An Exploration,New Haven. . 1993. Facesof Power:Alexander'sImageand Hellenistic Politics(Hellenistic Culture and Society 11), Berkeley. 1998. "Goddess or Queen? A Colossal Marble Head -----. in the Athenian Agora," in Palagia and Coulson 1998, pp. 83-91. Stillwell, R. 1929. "The Theatre at Corinth," AJA33, pp. 7797.

xxx

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

StobiIII = J. Wiseman and B. Aleksova, eds., Studies in the Antiquitiesof StobiIII, Beograd 1981. Stone, S. 1994. "The Toga: From National to Ceremonial Costume," in Sebesta and Bonfante 1994, pp. 13-45. Strong, D. E. 1953. "LateHadrianic Architectural Ornament in Rome," BSR21, n.s. 8, pp. 118-151. . 1961. RomanImperialSculpture,London. . 1988. RomanArt (The Pelican History of Art), 2nd ed., R. Ling, ed., Harmondsworth. Stroud, R. S. 1965. "The Sanctuary of Demeter and Kore on Acrocorinth, Preliminary Report I: 1961-1962," Hesperia 34, pp. 1-24. StuartJones 1912-1926 = H. StuartJones, A Catalogueof the Ancient SculpturesPreservedin the Municipal Collectionsof Rome,Oxford I = TheSculpturesof theMuseoCapitolino,1912. II = TheSculpturesof thePalazzodei Conservatori,1926. Sturgeon, M. C. 1975. "A New Group of Sculptures from Ancient Corinth," Hesperia44, pp. 280-301. . 1977. "The Reliefs on the Theater of Dionysos in Athens," AJA81, pp. 31-53. . 1982. "A Classicizing Statue in Ancient Corinth," AJA86, pp. 219-226. .1984. Rev. of Schmidt 1982, in AJA88, pp. 415-416. . 1989. "RomanSculptures from Corinth and Isthmia: A Case for a Local Workshop," in Walker and Cameron 1989, pp. 114-121. . 1990. "AnEarlyRoman Portraitat Corinth,"in Akten desXIII.InternationalenKongressesfirklassischeArchdologie, Berlin 1988, Mainz, p. 512. . 1995. "The Corinth Amazon: Formation of a Roman Classical Sculpture," AJA99, pp. 483-505. 1996. "The Palaimonion Group: New Roman Statu. ary at Isthmia" (paper, San Diego 1995), abstract in AJA 100, p. 399. . 1998a. "A Peloponnesian Aphrodite: The Corinth Theater Type," in ZTEPANOS,pp. 223-233. . 1998b. "Hellenistic Sculpture at Corinth: The State of the Question," in Palagia and Coulson 1998, pp. 1-13. -- . 2003. "Sculpture of the Classical Style at Corinth: 1896-1996," in CorinthXX, pp. 351-368. . 2004. "Dedications of Roman Theaters," in XAPIZ: Essaysin Honorof SaraA. Immerwahr(HesperiaSuppl. 34), A. Chapin, ed., Princeton, pp. 411-429. Stuveras, R. 1969. Leputtodans l'artromain(CollLatomus99), Brussels. 6v 'AO0vat5 'EOwxov Svoronos, I. N. 1908. To Mouaelov,Athens. Swift, E. H. 1921. "AGroup of Roman Imperial Portraits at Corinth," AJA25, pp. 142-157. Tancke, K. 1989. Figuralkassettengriechischerund romischer Steindecken,Frankfurt. Theodorescu, D. 1996. "Lafronsscaenaedu theatre: Innovations et particularites a l'epoque de Zoilos,"in Aphrodisias Papers3, pp. 127-148. Thera = F. Hiller von Gaertringen, H. Dragendorff, and P. Wilski, Thera:Untersuchungen,Vermessungen, und Ausgrabungenin denJahren1859-1902, 4 vols., Berlin 18991909. ThessalonikiI = G. Despinis, T. Stefanidou-Tiveriou, and E. Voutiras, Catalogueof Sculpturein the ArchaeologicalMuseumof ThessalonikiI, Thessaloniki 1997. Thoenges-Stringaris, R. 1965. "Dasgriechische Totenmahl," AM 80, pp. 1-99. Thomas, E., and C. Witschel. 1992. "Constructing Reconstruction: Claim and Reality of Roman Rebuilding Inscriptions from the Latin West," BSR60, pp. 135-178.

Thompson, D. B. 1982. "A Dove for Dione," in Thompson Studies,pp. 155-162. Thompson, D. W. 1966. A Glossaryof GreekBirds, repr. of 1936 ed., Hildesheim. Thompson, H. A. 1949. "The Pedimental Sculpture of the Hephaisteion," Hesperia18, pp. 230-268. . 1976. TheAthenianAgora:A ShortGuide,Athens. ThompsonStudies= Studiesin AthenianArchitecture, Sculpture, and Topography Presentedto HomerA. Thompson(Hesperia Suppl. 20), Princeton 1982. Threpsiades, I. 1962. "E6pjioaTa-xa avaoxagapo (19591960)," ArchDelt16, B' [1960], pp. 21-22. Tobin,J. L. 1997. HerodesAttikosand theCityofAthens:Patronage and Conflictunder the Antonines (Archaia Hellas 4), Amsterdam. Todisco, L. 1985. "Un nuovo ritratto di principe guilioclaudio da Venosa," RM92, pp. 319-331. T6lle-Kastenbein, R. 1977. "Zur Mitra in klassischer Zeit," RA, pp. 23-26. Touloupa, E. 1986. "Dasbronzene Reiterstandbilddes Augustus aus dem nordagaischen Meer,"AM 101, pp. 185-205. xcci Touloupa, E., and S. Symeonoglou. 1967. "'ApXaL6onzS; [vyi%ea Bolcotrag," ArchDelt20, B'2 [1965], pp. 228-244. Toynbee,J. M. C. 1934. TheHadrianicSchool:A Chapterin the Historyof GreekArt, Cambridge. . 1951. Some Notes on Artists in the Roman World (CollLatomus6), Brussels. . 1971. Death and Burial in theRoman World(Aspects of Greek and Roman Life), Ithaca. . 1973. Animals in RomanLife and Art, Ithaca. Toynbee, J. M. C., and J. B. Ward-Perkins. 1950. "Peopled Scrolls: A Hellenistic Motif in Imperial Art," BSR 18, pp. 1-43. NewYork. Travlos,J.1971. PictorialDictionary ofAncientAthens, Trianti, I. 1985. 0 yAorzTo;dcxooa0ogT-oovaoo6Oro Mc6 rg Thessaloniki. HAeIaG;, in ApXac'a . 2002. "'EvavEo ropT-pa&To TouHIXarcova," e/rtvtx yAorC'rtx: o Ioo yAOrc ZrsiAtloo AVtepacuoa anl VvjYrl TpciTvrl,D. Damaskos, ed., Athens, pp. 157-169. Trillmich, W. 1981. "Eine Kopfreplik des Typus Monteverde in Merida," MM 22, pp. 268-289. True, M., andJ. Podany, eds. 1990. Marble:ArtHistoricaland ScientificPerspectiveson Ancient Sculpture(PapersDelivered at a SymposiumOrganizedby the Departmentof Antiquities and AntiquitiesConservationand Held at theJ. Paul Getty Museum,April 28-30, 1988), Malibu. Tucker, J. 1902. "Various Statues from Corinth," AJA 6, pp. 422-438. Tzachou-Alexandri, 0. 1980. "'Avaoxaccxp Oe'cdrpo oTcob; Prakt,pp. 64-67. TpOXcovS;'A-txng," , ed. 1989. Mind and Body:AthleticContestsin Ancient Greece(Exhibition, National Archaeological Museum, Athens, Greece, 15 May 1989-15January 1990), Athens. Ugolini, L. M. 1937. Butrinto:II mitod'Enea:Gli scavi, Rome. Umholz, G. 2002. "ArchitravalArrogance? Dedicatory Inscriptions in Greek Architecture of the Classical Period," Hesperia71, pp. 261-293. Vermaseren CCCA= M.J. Vermaseren, CorpusCultusCybelae Attidisque(EPRO50), Leiden I = Asia Minore, 1987.

II = Graeciaatqueinsulae, 1982. Vermeule, C. C. 1959-1960. "Hellenistic and Roman Cuirassed Statues I," Berytus13, pp. 1-82. . 1965. "A Greek Theme and Its Survivals:The Rulers' Shield (Tondo Image) in Tomb and Temple," ProcPhilSoc6, pp. 361-397.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

xxxI

Walter, 0. 1923. BeschreibungderReliefsim kleinenAkropolismuseumin Athen,Vienna. 1972. "Greek Funerary Animals, 450-300 B.C.," AJA . Walter-Karydi, E. 1997. "Skylla, Bilder, und Aspekte des Mischwesens,"JdI 112, pp. 167-189. 76, pp. 49-59. . 1977. "Commodus, Caracalla, and the Tetrarchs: Walters, E.J. 1988. AtticGraveReliefsThatRepresentWomenin theDressofIsis (HesperiaSuppl. 22), Princeton. Roman Emperors as Hercules," in Festschriftfur Frank in theDepartWalters, H. B. 1903. Catalogueof the Terracottas Brommer,U. Hockmann and A. Krug, eds., Mainz, British Lonment Greek and Roman 289-294. Museum, of Antiquities, pp. don. . 1981. Greekand Roman Sculpturein America:Master. 1915. SelectBronzes,Greek,Roman, and Etruscan, in piecesin Public Collectionsin the UnitedStatesand Canada, the Departmentsof Antiquities,London. Berkeley. . 1986. "FiguralPillars: From Asia Minor to Corinth ---Ward-Perkins,J. B. 1948. "SeveranArt and Architecture at to Rome," in Corinthiaca:Studies in Honor of DarrellA. Leptis Magna,"JRS38, pp. 59-80. 71-80. 1992. Marblein Antiquity:Collected A. M. Del . Chiaro, ed., Columbia, Mo., pp. PapersofJ.B. WardAmyx, Perkins(Archaeological Monographs of the BritishSchool Versakis, F. 1909. "Das Skenengebaude des Dionysos-Theat Rome 6), H. Dodge and B. Ward-Perkins, eds., Lonaters,"JdI 24, pp. 194-224. don. della Misnei lavori di 1978. P. Verzone, "Hierapolis Frigia sione archeologica italiana," Quadernide "LaricercascienWatzinger, C. 1901. "Die Ausgrabungen am Westabhange der Akropolis V: Einzelfunde," AM 26, pp. 305-332. tifica"100, Rome, pp. 391-475. Waywell,G. B. 1971. "Athena Mattei,"BSA66, pp. 373-382. Veyne, P. 1990. Bread and Circuses:Historical Sociologyand . 1973. "The Sculpture," in Knossos:TheSanctuaryof PoliticalPluralism,B. Pearce, trans., abr. ed., London. Demeter(BSA Suppl. 8), J. N. Coldstream, ed., Oxford, Vierneisel, K., and P. Zanker. 1979. Die BildnissedesAugustus: Herrscherbildund Politik im kaiserlichenRom (Exhibition, pp. 93-98. . 1978. The Free-Standing Sculptures of the MausoGlyptothek Mfinchen, Dec. 1978 to Mar. 1979; Antikenleum at Halicarnassusin the BritishMuseum:A Catalogue, museum Berlin, Staatliche Museen Preussischer KulturLondon. besitz, Apr. toJune 1979), Munich. . 1986. TheLeverand HopeSculptures(Monumenta artis Miinchen,Katalogder Vierneisel-Schl6rb, B. 1979. Glyptothek romanae des 5. und Klassische II: 16), Berlin. 4.Jahrhunderts Skulpturen Skulpturen . 1989. "FurtherThoughts on the Placing and Interv. Chr.,Munich. sur les ateliersde sculpteurset la cite Viviers, D. 1992. Recherches pretation of the Freestanding Sculptures from the Maud'Athenesa lI'poquesarchaique:Endoios,Philergos,Aristokles, soleum," in Architectureand Societyin HecatomnidCaria Brussels. (Proceedingsof the UppsalaSymposium1987) (Boreas17), T. Linders and P. Hellstr6m, eds., Uppsala, pp. 23-30. Vollkommer, R. 1988. Heraklesin the Art of ClassicalGreece, . 1996. "The Scylla Monument from Bargylia,"AntP Oxford. Griechische C. 1983. 25, Kinderstatuen, Vorster, pp. 75-119. Cologne. . 1989. "Bonner Abguss einer Verschollenen HeraWaywell,G. B., andJ.J. Wilkes. 1994. "Excavationsat Sparta: The Roman Stoa, 1988-91, Preliminary Report 2," BSA klesherme," in Festschriftfur Nikolaus Himmelmann:Beiund Hermeneutik zur 89, pp. 377-432. (BJb-BH 47), Ikonographie trige . 1995. "Excavationsat the Ancient Theatre of Sparta H.-U. Cain, H. Gabelmann, and D. Salzmann, eds., Mainz, 1992-94: Preliminary Report," BSA90, pp. 435-460. pp. 281-288. Webb, P. A. 1996. HellenisticArchitecturalSculpture:Figural Wace, A. J. B. 1905-1906. "Excavations at Sparta: The Roman Baths," BSA 12, pp. 407-414. Motifsin WesternAnatolia and theAegeanIslands (Wisconsin Studies in Classics), Madison. Die Werkstatt Waelkens, M. 1982. Dokimeion: derReprisentativen kleinasiatischenSarkophage:Chronologieund Typologieihrer Weber,H. 1976-1977. "Spathellenistische Bildniskunst,"OJh 51 (Suppl.), cols. 19-47. Produktion,Berlin. Weber, M. 1976. "Die Amazonen von Ephesos," JdI 91, . 1985. "From a Phrygian Quarry: The Provenance of the Statues of the Dacian Prisoners in Trajan'sForum pp. 28-96. . 1999. "Sabina aus Gortyn im Nationalmuseum in at Rome," AJA89, pp. 641-653. of and "The Foundation H. 1997. M. E. Athen," AA, pp. 493-500. Planning Walbank, B. L. 1960. "Greek Dramatic Monuments from T. 95-130. Webster, Roman 10, Corinth," pp. JRA Early Athenian the 2 der Agora and Pnyx,"Hesperia29, pp. 254-284. Waldhauer, 0. 1931. Die antiken Skulpturen Ermitage Monuments .1961. aus russischen IllustratingNewComedy(BICSSuppl. Sammlung(Archaologische Mitteilungen 11), London. en), Berlin. Webster,T. B. L., andJ. R. Green. 1978. MonumentsIllustratWalker, S. E. 1979. "The Architectural Development of Roman Nymphaea in Greece" (diss. University of London). ing Old and MiddleComedy(BICSSuppl. 39), 3rd ed., rev. and enl., London. . 1987. "Roman Nymphaea in the Greek World," in in antoninischerZeit Wegner, M. 1939. Die Herrscherbildnisse Macready and Thompson 1987, pp. 60-71. vol. Herrscherbild r6mische Renaissance 2, The Greek 4), Berlin. 1989. eds. (Das pt. Walker,S., and A. Cameron, . 1956. Hadrian, Plotina, Marciana, Matidia, Sabina in theRomanEmpire(Papersfrom the TenthBritishMuseum ClassicalColloquium)(BICSSuppl. 55), London. (Das r6mischer Herrscherbild pt. 2, vol. 3), Berlin. . 1966. Die Musensarkophage Au(ASRV, 3), Berlin. Wallace, R. W. 1997. "Poet, Public, and 'Theatrocracy': .1979. "Nachtrage zum r6mischen Herrscherbild im dience Performance in Classical Athens," in Poet,Public, 2.Jh. n. Chr. I: Verzeichnis der Kaiserbildnisse von Antoand Performancein AncientGreece,L. Edmunds and R. W. ninus Pius bis Commodus," Boreas2, pp. 87-181. Wallace, eds., Baltimore, pp. 97-111. Weiss, P. 1981. "Ein agonistisches Bema und die isopythWallace, W. E. 1994. Michelangeloat San Lorenzo:The Genius ischen Spiele von Side," Chiron11, pp. 315-346. New York. as Entrepreneur, . 1968. Roman ImperialArt in Greeceand Asia Minor, Cambridge, Mass.

xxxii

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

Welch, K. 1999. "Negotiating Roman Spectacle Architecture in the Greek World:Athens and Corinth," in Bergmann and Kondoleon 1999, pp. 125-145. West, R. 1933. RimischePortrdtplastik I, Munich. . 1941. RimischePortrdtplastik II, Munich. Wiegartz, H. 1977. "Zu Problemen einer Chronologie der attischen Sarkophage," AA, pp. 383-388. Willers, D. 1986. "Typusund Motiv:Aus der hellenistischen Entwicklungsgeschichte einer Zweifigurengruppe,"AntK 29, pp. 137-150. Williams, C. K., II. 1978. "Pre-Roman Cults in the Area of the Forum of Ancient Corinth" (diss. University of Pennsylvania). .1982. "Zeusand Other Deities: Notes on TwoArchaistic Piers," in ThompsonStudies,pp. 175-181. . 1993. "Roman Corinth as a Commercial Center,"in Gregory 1993, pp. 31-46. Williams, C. K., II, andJ. E. Fischer. 1975. "Corinth, 1974: Forum Southwest," Hesperia44, pp. 1-50. Williams, C. K., II, and 0. H. Zervos. 1983. "Corinth, 1982: East of the Theater," Hesperia52, pp. 1-47. . 1984. "Corinth, 1983: The Route to Sikyon,"Hesperia 53, pp. 83-122. . 1985. "Corinth, 1984: East of the Theater," Hesperia 54, pp. 55-96. . 1986. "Corinth, 1985: East of the Theater," Hesperia 55, pp. 129-175. . 1987. "Corinth, 1986: Temple E and East of the Theater," Hesperia56, pp. 1-46. . 1988. "Corinth, 1987: South of Temple E and East of the Theater," Hesperia57, pp. 95-146. - . 1989. "Corinth, 1988: East of the Theater," Hesperia 58, pp. 1-50. . 1990. "Excavationsat Corinth, 1989: The Temenos --of Temple E," Hesperia59, pp. 325-369. . 1991. "Corinth, 1990: Southeast Corner of Temenos E," Hesperia60, pp. 1-58. Williams, E. R. 1982. "A Terracotta Herakles at the Johns Hopkins University,"Hesperia51, pp. 357-364. Wilson, L. M. 1924. TheRoman Toga,Baltimore. New Wilson Jones, M. 2000. Principlesof RomanArchitecture, Haven. Winkes, R. 1969. Clipeataimago: Studien zu einer romischen Bildnisform(Habelts Dissertationsdrucke,Reihe klassische Archaologie 1), Bonn. Winkler,J.J. 1985. Auctorand Actor:A NarratologicalReading ofApuleius' "TheGoldenAss, "Berkeley. Winter,F. 1898. "Sculpturen,"in Altertiimervon Hierapolis(JdIEH4), C. Humann, C. Cichorius, W.Judeich, and F.Winter, eds., Berlin, pp. 59-62, 63-65. . 1903. Die TypenderfigiirlichenTerrakotten (Die antiken Terrakotten, Auftrag des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts 3), 2 vols., Berlin. Wiseman,J. 1979. "Corinth and Rome I: 228 B.C.-A.D. 267," ANRWII.7.1, pp. 438-548. Wojcik, M. R. 1986. La VilladeiPapiri ad Ercolano:Contributo alla ricostruzionedell'ideologiadella nobilitas tardorepubblicana,Rome. Wolters, P. 1928. Fiihrerdurchdie Glyptothek Kinig LudwigsI. in Miinchen,Munich. Wood, S. E. 1986. RomanPortraitSculpture,217-260 A.D.:The Transformationof an ArtisticTradition(Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition 12), Leiden. Woodward, A. M. 1923-1925. "Excavationsat Sparta, 1924-

25, 2: The Theatre; 3: The Inscriptions,"BSA26, pp. 119239. . 1925-1926. "Excavationsat Sparta, 1926,2: The Theatre; 3: The Inscriptions," BSA27, pp. 175-254. . 1926-1927. "Excavationsat Sparta, 1927: The Theatre: Appendix: Sculptures from the Theatre and the Nymphaeum," BSA28, pp. 22-36. 1928-1930. "Excavationsat Sparta, 1924-28, 1: The . Theatre," BSA30, pp. 151-240. Kleinasien: W6rrle, M. 1988. Stadt und Festim kaiserzeitlichen Studienzu eineragonistischenStiftungaus Oinoanda(Vestigia: Beitrage zur Alte Geschichte 39), Munich. von Welschbillig: Wrede, H. 1972. Die spdtantikeHermengalerie Untersuchungzur Kunsttraditionim 4. Jahrhundertn. Chr. und zur allgemeinenBedeutung des antiken Hermenmals (R6misch-Germanische Forschungen 32), Berlin. . 1981. Consecratioin FormamDeorum: Vergottliche Privatpersonenin derromischenKaiserzeit,Mainz. . 1985. Die antikeHerme(Trierer Beitrage zur Altertumskunde 1), Mainz. Wright, K. S. 1980. "A Tiberian Pottery Deposit from Corinth," Hesperia49, pp. 135-177. Yalouris, N. 1992. Die Skulpturen des Asklepiostempelsin Epidauros(AntP21), Munich. Yavis,C. G. 1949. GreekAltars:Originsand Typology, Including theMinoan-MycenaeanOffertory Apparatus:An Archaeological Studyin theHistoryof Religion,St. Louis. Yegiil, F. K. 1982. "A Study in Architectural Iconography: Kaisersaaland the Imperial Cult," ArtB64, pp. 7-31. Yfantidis, K. 1984. "Die Polychromie der hellenistischen Plastik" (diss. Universitat Mainz). Zagdoun, M.-A. 1989. La sculpture archaisante dans l'art hellenistiqueet dans l'art romain du Haut-Empire(BEFAR 269), 2 vols., Athens. Zancani-Montuoro, P. 1933. "Repliche romane di una statua fidiaca," BullCom61, pp. 25-58. Zanker, P. 1970. "DasTrajansforumin Rom,"AA,pp. 499-543. . 1972. Rev.of Lauter 1966, in Gnomon44, pp. 385-389. . 1973. Studienzu den Augustus-PortritsI: Der ActiumTypus (Abhandlung G6ttinger Akademie der Wissenschaft F. 3, 85), Gottingen. . 1974. KlassizistischeStatuen:Studienzur Verdnderung desKunstgeschmacks in derrimischenKaiserzeit,Mainz. . 1979. "ZurFunktion und Bedeutung griechischer Skulptur in der R6merzeit," in Le classicismea Romeaux 1ersieclesavant et apresJ.-C.:Neuf exposissuivis de discussions (EntrHardt 25), T. Gelzer et al., eds., Geneva, pp. 283-314. . 1980. "Einh6her Offizier Trajans,"in Eikones:Studien zum griechischenund romischenBildnis: Hans Juckerzum (AntK-BH12), R. A. Stucky sechzigstenGeburtstaggewidmet and I. Jucker, eds., Bern, pp. 196-202. . 1983. ProvinzielleKaiserportrdts:Zur Receptionder desPrinceps(AbhMiinch,n.s. 90), Munich. Selbstdarstellung . 1988. ThePowerof Imagesin theAge of Augustus (Jerome Lectures 16th ser.), H. A. Shapiro, trans.,Ann Arbor. . 1993. "The Hellenistic Grave Stelai from Smyrna: Identity and Self-Image in the Polis," in Bulloch et al. 1993, pp. 212-230. Zazoff, P. 1962. "Ephedrismos: Ein altgriechische Spiel," A&A 11, pp. 35-42. Ziegler, R. 1985. StddtischesPrestigeund kaiserlichePolitik: StudienzumFestwesenin Ostkilikienim 2. und 3. Jahrhundert nach Christus(Kultur und Erkenntnis 2), Dusseldorf.

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

xxxIII

PERIODICALS, LEXICA, AND CORPORA A&A = Antike und Abendland. Beitriigezum Verstdndnisder Griechenund Romerund ihresNachlebens AA = Archdologischer Anzeiger AAA = 'Apxaorooylxa'Avdox-cxza iE 'AO0vc6v AbhHeid = Abhandlungen der Heidelberger Akademie der Klasse Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische AbhMiinch= Bayerische AkademiederWissenschaften, Miinchen, Klasse.Abhandlungen Philosophisch-historische ActaArch= Acta archaeologica(Copenhagen) AF= ArchiologischeForschungen AgoraPicBk= Excavationsof theAthenianAgora.PictureBook AJA= AmericanJournal of Archaeology AM = Mitteilungen des Deutschen ArchiologischenInstituts, AthenischeAbteilung AM-BH= MitteilungendesDeutschenArchdologischen Instituts, AthenischeAbteilung.Beiheft AnalRom= AnalectaromanaInstitutiDanici AnatSt= Anatolian Studies.Journal of theBritishInstituteof Archaeologyat Ankara ANRW = H. Temporini, ed., Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischenWelt,Berlin 1972AntK = Antike Kunst. Hrsg. von der Vereinigungder Freunde antikerKunst in Basel AntK-BH= AntikeKunst. Beiheft AntP = AntikePlastik AntW = Antike Welt. Zeitschriftfur Archdologieund Kulturgeschichte AR= Archaeological Reports(Suppl. toJHS) ArchCl= Archeologiaclassica ArchDelt= 'ApyatoAoytxj6v &A-Ziov 'EcpE7zpti ArchEph= 'ApXaooAoytx57 Journal ArchJ=Archaeological ArtB = The Art Bulletin

ARV2 =J. D. Beazley, Attic Red-figureVase-painters, 2nd ed., 3 vols., Oxford 1963 ASAtene= Annuario della Scuola archeologicadi Atene e delle MissioniItaliane in Oriente ASMOSIA= Proceedingsof the International Symposiaof the Associationfor the Studyof Marbleand OtherStonesUsedin Antiquity Berlin ASR = C. Robert et al., Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs, 1890AthensCongress= Ipaxrtxdz zoOXII AzIOvoo6 KaccrEZovzepioo AO,0va,4-10 2.ErEftPp(oo1983 /Acts of tx,q ApXacoAoyic'a, Aththe 12th InternationalCongressof ClassicalArchaeology, 1983, 4 vols., Athens 1985-1988 ens, 4-10 September Ausonia= Ausonia. Rivista dellaSocietditaliana di archeologiae storiadell'arte BABesch= Bulletinantiekebeschaving.Annual Paperson Classical Archaeology BAR= BritishArchaeological Reports BAR-IS= BritishArchaeological Reports,InternationalSeries BCH= Bulletin de correspondance hellenique BClevMus= TheBulletin of the ClevelandMuseumof Art BdA = Bollettino d'arte

BEFAR= BibliothequedesEcolesfrancaisesd'Atheneset de Rome Berytus= Berytus.ArchaeologicalStudiesby the Museum of Archaeologyof theAmericanUniversityof Beirut BICS= Bulletin of theInstituteof ClassicalStudiesof the University of London in Bonn desRheinischenLandesmuseums BJb= BonnerJahrbiicher im Rheinlande und des Vereinsvon Altertumsfreunden

desRheinischenLandesmuseumsin BJb-BH= BonnerJahrbiicher Bonn und des Vereinsvon Altertumsfreunden im Rheinlande, Beiheft BMC= Catalogueof theGreekCoinsin theBritishMuseum,London 1873BMMA= Bulletin of theMetropolitanMuseumof Art, New York Boreas= Boreas,MiinsterscheBeitrigezurArchiologie BrBr = H. Brunn, F. Bruckmann, P. Arndt, and G. Lippold, Denkmiilergriechischerund romischerSkulpturin historischer Anordnung,Munich 1888-1911 BSA= Annual of theBritishSchoolat Athens BSR= Papersof theBritishSchoolat Rome BullCom= Bullettinodella CommissionearcheologicaComunale di Roma BullEp= Bulletinepigraphique(Paris) BWPr= Berlin Winckelmannsprogramm CEFR= Collectionde l'Ecolefrancaisede Rome Chiron= Chiron.MitteilungenderKommissionfiiralte Geschichte und EpigraphikdesDeutschenArchdologischen Instituts CIG= Corpusinscriptionumgraecarum CIL= Corpusinscriptionumlatinarum CJ= The ClassicalJournal Clairmont, CAT=C. W. Clairmont, ClassicalAtticTombstones, 8 vols., Kilchberg 1993 ClRh= Clara Rhodos.Studi e materialipubblicatia cura dell' Institutostorico-archeologico di Rodi CollLatomus= CollectionLatomus CP= Classical Philology

CSCA= Universityof CaliforniaStudiesin ClassicalArchaeology DarSag = C. Daremberg and E. Saglio, Dictionnairedes antiquitesgrecqueset romainesd'apresles texteset les monuments, 5 vols., Paris 1877-1919 DOP= DumbartonOaksPapers EA= P.Arndt and W. Amelung, PhotographischeEinzelaufnahmenantikerSkulpturen, G. Lippold, ed., Munich 1893-1940 EAA = Enciclopediadell'arteantica: Classicae orientale,Rome 1958EntrHardt= EntretiensHardt EPRO=Etudesprliminairesaux religionsorientalesdans l'empire romain A X EcXraipec'i Ergon= T6 "Epyov 'ApxacxoAoytx,g Esperandieu = E. Esp6randieu, Recueilgeneraldes bas-reliefs, statues,et bustesde la Gaule romaine(Collection de documents inedits sur l'histoire de France), 16 vols., Paris 1907-1928 GettyMusJ=TheJ. Paul GettyMuseumJournal GGA= Gottingische gelehrteAnzeiger Gnomon= Gnomon.KritischeZeitschriftfiirdiegesamteklassische Altertumswissenschaft GRBS= Greek,Roman, and ByzantineStudies HdA = Handbuch der Archiologie (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft),Berlin 1931Helbig4 = W. Helbig, FiihrerdurchdieiffentlichenSammlungen klassischerAltertiimerin Rom,4th ed., rev., H. Speier, ed., 4 vols., Tiibingen 1963-1972 Hellenica= L. Robert, ed., Hellenica:Recueild'epigraphiede 13 vols., Limoges 1940numismatiqueet d'antiquitegrecque, 1965 Hesperia= Hesperia.TheJournalof theAmericanSchoolof Classical Studiesat Athens HSCP= HarvardStudiesin ClassicalPhilology HThR = Harvard TheologicalReview

BIBLIOGRAPHY AND ABBREVIATIONS

XXXIV

Icr = Inscriptionescreticae,M. Guarducci, ed., Rome 19351950 ID = F. Durrbach et al., InscriptionsdeDlos, Paris 1926IFAR= InternationalFoundationfor Art Research,Inc. IG = Inscriptionesgraecae Iran = Iran.Journal of theBritishInstituteof PersianStudies IRT = J. M. Reynolds and J. B. Ward-Perkins, eds., The Inscriptionsof Roman Tripolitania,Rome 1952. desDeutschenArchiologischen IstForsch= IstanbulerForschungen

RA = Revue archeologique

Instituts

IstMitt= IstanbulerMitteilungen IstMitt-BH=IstanbulerMitteilungen.Beiheft JdI = JahrbuchdesDeutschenArchiologischenInstituts JdI-EH = Jahrbuch des Deutschen ArchdologischenInstituts. Erginzungsheft JHS= Journal of HellenicStudies JRA = Journal of RomanArchaeology JRS= Journal of RomanStudies JWarb= Journal of the Warburgand CourtauldInstitutes = Kerameikos. Kerameikos ErgebnissederAusgrabungen Latomus= Latomus.Revued'etudeslatines LIMC = Lexiconiconographicummythologiaeclassicae,Zurich and Munich 1974-1997 MAAR= Memoirsof theAmericanAcademyin Rome MEFRA= Melangesde IEcolefrancaisede Rome,Antiquite MemAcInscr= Memoirespresentespar diverssavants I'Academie des inscriptionset belleslettres(Paris) MM = MadriderMitteilungen Mnemosyne= Mnemosyne.Bibliothecaclassicabatava MonAnt= Monumentiantichipublicatidall'accademiadeiLincei MonPiot= Monumentset memoires.FondationE. Piot NumAntCl=Numismaticae antichitaclassiche,Quademiticinesi OCD3= S. Hornblower and A. Spawforth, eds., The Oxford ClassicalDictionary,3rd ed., Oxford 1996 OJh=Jahresheftedes Osterreichischen archiologischenInstitutsin Wien

ABBREVIATIONS BM cm D. diam. dim. est. FIB fr. H. inv.

OlForsch= Olympische Forschungen PACT= PACTJournal of theEuropeanNetworkof Scientificand TechnicalCooperation for the CulturalHeritage PBA = Proceedingsof theBritishAcademy Phoenix = Phoenix. TheJournal of the ClassicalAssociationof Canada Prakt= Hpaocxzxa 'Ezraipit' zTqSv 'ArOvaic'ApxaioAoyxrfSq ProcPhilSoc= Proceedingsof theAmericanPhilosophicalSociety Prospettiva= Prospettiva.Rivista d'arteantica e moderna

British Museum centimeter depth diameter dimension estimated Find Inventory Book fragment height inventory

IS IS L. 1. m max. MFA min. mm MMA

RdA= Rivista di archeologia RDAC= Reportof theDepartmentof Antiquities,Cyprus RE = A. Pauly, G. Wissowa, and W. Kroll, Real-Encyclopddie 1893derklassischenAltertumswissenschaft, REA= Revuedes etudesanciennes REG= Revuedes etudesgrecques RendPontAcc = Atti della Pontificia Accademia romana di archeologia RivlstArch= Rivista dell'Istitutonazionaled'archeologiae storia dell'arte RM = Mitteilungen des Deutschen ArchiologischenInstituts, RomischeAbteilung RM-EH= MitteilungendesDeutschenArchdologischen Instituts, RomischeAbteilung,Ergdnzungsheft Lexikondergriechischen Roscher = W. H. Roscher, Ausfiihrliches und rimischenMythologie,6 vols., Leipzig 1884-1937 SEG= Supplementumepigraphicumgraecum SIMA= Studiesin MediterraneanArchaeology SkrAth= Skrifterutgivna av SvenskaInstituteti Athen SNGCop= Syllogenummorumgraecorum,Copenhagen e storiadell'arte StMisc= Studimiscellanei.Seminariodi archeologia grecae romanadell'Universitadi Roma TAM= E. Kalinka et al., eds., Tituli Asiae Minoris,Vienna 1901-1944 TAPA= Transactionsof theAmericanPhilologicalAssociation

USED IN THE CATALOGUE

Isthmia Inscription Isthmia Sculpture length left meter maximum Museum of Fine Arts minimum millimeter Metropolitan Museum of Art

NB NM p. r. rest. S Th. Tr. W.

excavation notebook National Museum preserved right restored Sculpture inventory thickness trench width

Pigment color numbers are from Munsell Soil ColorCharts,Baltimore 1975.

SCULPTURE

THE ASSEMBLAGE FROM THE THEATER

INTRODUCTION

A

t the time of its creation in the Hadrianic period, the Corinth Theater presented the

most elaborate form of Roman theater architecture to date-a three-storied columnar facade made of multicolored marble. The polychrome architecture, composed of multicolored stones, did not stand alone, for the scaenae frons was impressively embellished with painted marble reliefs beneath the columns, with painted statuary between the columns and in the niches, and with painted busts in the pediments. The scaenae frons contained a sculptural complex that evoked the Theater's political, religious, and cultural functions as well as the self-identification of the city. The reconstruction offered here shows a sculptural display dominated by a colossal seated portrait of the deified emperor Trajan, set in the largest niche, over the porta regia. Flanking this in the niches over the hospitalia stood portraits, possibly of Augustus and Livia, and above, in the central niche of the third story, stood a cuirassed figure, possibly Hadrian. Viewed collectively, the imperial family group conveys the message of Roman Imperial government, celebrates the virtusof the emperor, and legitimizes his rule. The previously published reliefs, with Gigantomachy, Amazonomachy, and Herakles scenes restored on podia across the three stories of the facade, are complemented by Silenos piers flanking the third-story niche. Confronting griffins in relief above Trajan's statue set off his portrait with a popular motif that perhaps alluded to his eastern campaigns. High-relief heads of Triton and a Nereid (or Aphrodite) project over the hospitalia, while busts of Demeter(?) and Poseidon(?) enhance the side pediments of the second story, and Helios(?) crowns the entire facade in the pediment of the third. Thus, Corinth's important affiliations provide the contemporary context and a conscious link to Greek culture for the Roman colony of Corinth. The sculptures on the scaenae frons would have been seen from a distance, and they would have been read collectively in related segments, as well as individually. Along the edges of the stage, parodoi, and cavea stood portraits of high-ranking civic and provincial officials, priests, and benefactors, which were counterparts to the imperial political figures on the scaenae frons. Statues of deities and athletic and mythological figures between and before the columns-which may represent, from left to right in the proposed reconstruction, a Dioskouros, Aphrodite, Ares, Athena, Artemis, Antinous, Dionysos, two athletes, Pan(?), Herakles, and Chiron-are symbols of culture, religion, drama, athletics, and education. Altars to Apollo and Dionysos(?), a gilt imago, a stele celebrating prizes, and a boy victor's statue base allude to activities that were regularly featured in ancient theaters, such as religious processions, contests, and victory celebrations. Mythological battle scenes depicting the defeat of the giants as well as barbarians and easterners establish a victory theme on the scaenae frons. Herakles is given the highest position, as if to

highlight his elevation to the realm of the gods, where he represents the ultimate Roman, and Peloponnesian, exemplumvirtutis.Many of the protagonists of dramatic events, especially the mimes and pantomimes so popular in the 2nd century A.C., appear on the facade. On the first tier, statues of divinities stand above battle reliefs in which the gods triumph. On the second tier, Trajan's posthumous image is set off by reliefs showing the defeat of the eastern Amazons, the myth providing an analogy to his Parthian campaigns. On the third, the reigning emperor Hadrian, arrayed in military costume, is placed in the context of the triumphs of Herakles.

2

INTRODUCTION

In the proposed reconstruction, the highly articulated decoration of the Corinth Theater facade is a vehicle for the self-presentationof Corinth as a Roman city,as a Roman colony, and as the prosperous capital of the province of Achaia. Both the selection of subjects and their location on the facade are deliberate, such that the sculptures are thematically interrelated both verticallyand horizontally.The sculpturalprogram celebrates the virtusof the reigning emperor and of past Roman emperors, while it also emphasizes the importance of military triumphs and

hereditary right to rule. The ideas are promoted of Corinth as an important political and cultural center and as a city situated at the crossroads of East and West, populated by people of many ethnic backgrounds.Moreover,the use of Latin in the dedicatoryinscriptions in the entablature and on revetment plaques highlights Corinth's status as a Roman colony. Both image and text convey important messages, which can be read singly, in segments, and as a whole. As one of the most important places in the city for large gatherings of people, citizens and foreigners alike,

the Theater provided an excellent locale for such propagandisticstatements and for the display of substantial public benefactions. Moreover, the multifaceted decoration of the scaenae frons exhibits a constructed iconography. The different forms, subjects, and scale of the Theater fa-

cade sculptures provided the setting for the religious, political, and dramatic spectacles that were likely to have been featured on this stage. This book presentsthe unpublishedsculpturesfrom the CorinthTheaterwith description,analysis, photographs, and drawings. It is intended to supplement Stillwell's CorinthII (1952) on the Theater architecture and my CorinthIX, ii (1977) on the reliefs from the Theater. Sculptures

from the Theater first appeared in Johnson's CornthIX (1931), which published the marble statuaryfound at Corinth between 1896 and 1923. They are illustratedhere also, with new, more detailed photographs. Inscriptions from the Theater, which were published by Kent in Corinth VIII, iii (1966), Meritt and West in CorinthVIII, i and ii (1931), and Stillwell in CorinthII, are also

discussed, in order to give a fuller picture of the chronological phases and social history of the Theater complex and, ultimately,the meaning of its sculptural assemblage. HISTORY OF THE CORINTH THEATER

THE EXCAVATIONS

Topographical interest in Ancient Corinth has long centered on the Theater. Excavations at Corinth, conducted under the auspices of the American School of ClassicalStudies at Athens, began in 1896 with the first attempts to locate the Theater through exploratory trenches and to relate it to Pausanias's description of the city in the mid-2nd century A.C. (2.2.4-2.5.4) .1Pausanias

(2.4.5) mentions the Theater as he moves north toward the Spring of Lerna, but he records nothing about its decoration. More concentrated efforts aimed at determining the boundaries

of the Theater were made during the campaigns of 1902-1903, 1908, and 1909-1910.2 Largerscale excavationswere carried out in the Theater by T. Leslie Shear Sr.in 1925 and 1926, and in 1. Conducted by the School's Director, R. B. Richardson, and F. C. Babbitt (Corinth NB 1). Reported in Richardson 1897a; 1897b, pp. 478-479 (pl. 18, detailed plan of tr. 18a-f); Babbitt1897. The earlytrenches are also indicated in CorinthI, fig. 3. On the date of Pausanias,see Habicht 1985, pp. 9-12; book 2 appears to have been written in the 160s. 2. 1902:trench 34 cut across the center and west portion of the stage, exposing part of the front of the Greekskene; Bassett (Corinth NBs 14, 15). 1903: trench 34 extended to the west; D. M. Robinson (Corinth NB 26); see CorinthI, pl. III. 1908:

trench 18b extended to the upper cavea wall; Robinson and G. W. Elderkin (Corinth NB 45, p. 72; Corinth NB 48, p. 86). 1909:trench 34 extended south to the Roman orchestralevel, and trench 18h widened, in the upper cavea;W. B. Dinsmoor (Corinth NB 58). Trenches 18a-c;J. B. Edwards(Corinth NB 58). 1910: trench 34 extended north to the northern edge of the PeristyleCourt,with ajog to the east for the fountain basin, and trench 18d ran parallelto this to the east;C. A. K. Sanborn (Corinth NB 65).

HISTORY OF THE CORINTH THEATER

3

1928 and 1929, when most of the scene building, parodoi, vomitoria, the east half of the Peristyle Court, and East Theater Plaza and Street were uncovered.3Trial trenches were sunk by Stillwell in 1929, 1930, and 1948 as part of his studyfor publication of the architecture.4More recently,in campaigns from 1982 to 1988, Williamshas investigatedparts of the eastern cavea, its buttresses, and areas east of the Theater.5For the location of the early trenches, see Plan I. Sculptures were unearthed during all phases of the Theater excavations, but in especially large quantities during the 1920s. Manypieces were incorporated into the inventoried sculpture collection as they were discovered, but others were taken to the courtyardof the Old Museum in Ancient Corinth or to the basement of Shear's house, which provided additional storage space. It was in the late 1960s that this materialwas transferredfrom the Shear house basement to the New Museum, and it was graduallythereafter that pieces from this marble pile entered the inventoried collection. The early date of the excavations, the loss of some excavation notebooks from the 1920s, and the fragmentarystate of the remains have resulted in an incomplete understanding of the Theater sculptures. The method of identifying sculptures as coming from the Theater has varied depending on the available information. For some objects the provenance is clearly stated as "Theater"in the inventory records. Other pieces have been recognized as coming from the Theater by association with drawingsin excavation notebooks, by decipherment of abbreviated provenances and dates, by the presence of de Waele'sblue-penciled initials (DW)and page numbers on the objects, and byjoining or association with a piece recorded as found in the Theater. Although the secondary provenances of "Shearapotheke," "Shear'sHouse," or "Museumbasement marble pile" do not provide conclusive evidence that a fragment wasfound in the Theater, the large number of unmarked sculptures in these piles which clearlyoriginated in the Theater, such as sections of the Silenos piers, suggests that other sculptures in these storage areas were also found in the Theater.All materialin the Shear house basement derivesfrom Shear'sexcavations, so if a piece does not come from the North Cemetery,the Roman chamber tombs, or the Roman Villa, it derives from the Theater.6 ARCHITECTURAL

PHASES

AND CHRONOLOGY

The history of the Theater architecture is discussed by Stillwellin CorinthII. It was subsequently revised by Williamsin annual reports in Hesperiaon the 1982 to 1988 excavations of the eastern cavea and its supports, and the chronology of the cavea and East Theater Plazahas been further refined by Williams.As with many buildings that were in use over a long period of time, possibly nine centuries in this case, the various stages of construction are difficult to decipher. Building material from the earlier phases was reused in later construction, and the structurewas heavily despoiled in late antiquityand after. Several aspects of the architecture have been brought into sharper focus by the recent excavations. For example, more subphases have been recognized, and it has emerged that the subphases in one area-for instance, the supports for the cavea seats-do not necessarily indicate subphases in another-for instance, the scaenae frons. Continual rebuilding in a single area has created an archaeological picture that is difficult to sort and date. It is thanks to Williams'scareful investigationsthat the architecturalsequences of the cavea and its supports are now much better understood, and to Kathleen Slane's analysisof the pottery that specific dates can be assigned with some confidence to the phases of these features.7For the 3. Shear 1925, 1926; CorinthI, pl. IV; Shear 1928a, 1928b, 1929;Stillwell1929;de Waele 1930. The notebooks of de Waele and Campbell for 1928 and 1929 survive. 4. CorinthII; see his introduction, pp. 3-4, for a more detailed account of the early excavations. 5. Williamsand Zervos1983 through 1989, esp. 1988, 1989.

Williamsand K. Slane are currentlystudyingthe chronological phases and the pottery from the East of Theater excavations. 6. For his excavation reports, see Shear 1928b, 1929, 1930, 1931b. On the Roman Villa, see CorinthV. 7. See Wright 1980, pp. 174-175, for the date of the Early Tiberian earthquake (A.D. 22/3).

INTRODUCTION

4

convenience of the reader, a summary of the major building phases of the Theater complex as they are currently understood is provided here, with some indication of the effect that architectural renovations had on the sculpture. Since the Hadrianic phase is the phase from which the greatest numbers of sculptures survive, the primary indicators of its chronology are summarized.

GreekTheater 1. Classicalphase,late5th toearly4th centuryB.C.From the earliest times, the spectatorwould have been seated in a natural hollow of land, facing north, overlooking the port city of Lechaion and the Gulf of Corinth. The view was enhanced by the backdrop of the receding and overlapping

mountain ranges of Geraneion to the northeast and Cithaeron, Helikon, and Parnassosbeyond Perachora to the north. Fragmentary survival, partial excavation, and overbuilding of later phases on the same site make distinction of the Greek phases difficult. Rows of holes in the bedrock suggest a temporary, wooden skene for some phase of the Greek theater, and straight sections of the gutter have suggested to some the possibility of three-sided seating. Some foundation blocks

for seats and a few inscribed limestone seats, variouslydated, may belong to the 4th-centuryB.C. theater.8 2. Hellenistic phase, late 4th to early 3rd century B.C. This phase had a permanent, stone stage

building with a columnar proskenion, an episkenion, and ramps leading up to the stage. Two Charonian stairs were built on either side of the orchestra, itself bordered by a deep gutter. Fifteen stairs divided the koilon into fourteen seating sections. Williams'stests of 1988 indicate that the cavea was enlarged in the 320s or possibly later and that a wall was added to the back. This building was probablydamaged during Mummius'ssack of the city in 146 B.C. as well as by

subsequent plundering.9 RomanTheater 1. Late Republicanto EarlyAugustan phase, late 1st centuryB.C. Sometime after the founding of the Roman colony Laus Julia Corinthiensis in 44 B.C., the Hellenistic theater was reworked. One change, the placement of the analemmata of the cavea at right angles to the central axis, put a

decidedly Roman stamp on the building.10 2. Late Augustan to Early Tiberianphase, early 1st centuryA.C.The cavea was made steeper, with

raking buttresses added to reinforce the raised cavea wall, and a Doric columnar promenade, decorated with a painted maroon frieze of Erotes, was added at the back. Architectural fragments of limestone, including two Doric capitals, may be associated with this or the preceding

phase. Little is known about the stage building in this phase." 3. Flavian to Trajanicphase, late 1st to early2nd centuryA.. The earthquake of A.D. 77 probably prompted the repairs that were made to the cavea buttresses during this period. Williams has suggested that these repairs may have taken 20 years to complete. They can perhaps be associated with a revetment plaque, an epistyle block, and an inscription naming Trajan on a gray

marble cornice block, this last dated no later than A.D. 101. The erasure of most of the text, the cutting down of the block, and the different clamp cuttings indicate that this cornice block was reused in the Hadrianic phase.'2 8. CorinthII, pp. 5, 8, 15-40; p. 110, nos. 41-49, fig. 86, pls. 3, 4; pp. 131-133; Williams and Zervos 1989, pp. 26-28. See Gebhard 1973, pp. 16-17, on possible three-sided seating at Corinth. Seat blocks: CorinthVIII,iii, nos. 11, 16, 17, 19-20. Kolb (1981, p. 82, note 18) believes that the inscribed seat blocks were brought into the Hellenistic cavea from outside the Theater. 9. CorinthII, pp. 6-12, 15-40, 131-135, pls. 3, 5:c, 8:a;Williams and Zervos 1989, pp. 26-28. 10. For a detailed discussion of the phases of the Roman theater, see Williams and Zervos 1988, pp. 108-120; 1989, pp. 28-36; and CorinthII, p. 81.

11. See Williams and Zervos 1987; 1984, pp. 97, 104-106, pl. 30:d, e (frieze); 1988, p. 112, no. 21 (capital); and CorinthII, pp. 58-65, 110, no. 50, fig. 86; and pp. 135-136. 12. Williams and Zervos 1987, p. 19. For the block, see Corinth II, pp. 114, 136 (on date), no. 89, figs. 88, 89; CorinthVIII, iii, no. 96 (1-2448), pl. 7, found at west end of stage building, April 1929 (P1. l:f here). The fact that this block was reused seems to explain in part why Stillwell found no others exactly like it among the remains of the Hadrianic phase. Since it was cut down to fit in a certain position and no other cornice blocks were of the same size, it probably was erected over one of the doors to the versurae, which was Stillwell's first suggestion.

HISTORY OF THE CORINTH THEATER

5

4. Hadrianic phase, second quarterof the 2nd centuryA.c.This phase, which entails a complete rebuilding of the earlier Roman stage building, is the most elaborate architecturally, presenting a three-storied, columnar scaenae frons with three monumental entrances set into curved exedrae, in the manner of many contemporary western and some eastern Roman theaters (Plan II:a-c). The scaenae frons was replete with painted sculptural decoration. A rectangular, columnar peristyle court with a fountain on its south side was constructed north of the scaenae frons. A large arch between the east-west street and East Theater Plaza monumentalized the entrance to the Theater on the east. Archaeological evidence indicates that the Hadrianic facade stood until the Theater's destruction in the 4th century A.C.,when it may have been toppled by an earthquake ca. A.D. 365 or 375.13 The evidence for assigning a Hadrianic date to the scaenae frons is as follows: a. Excavation: The discovery of a Hadrianic coin in a posthole for the aulaea, cutting no. 45, which is associated with the late-lst-century construction, suggested to Stillwell that the date for the 2nd-century marble phase should be at least during Hadrian's reign.14 b. Architecture: The cornice profiles find their closest stylistic parallels with the theater at Stobi, dated to the Hadrianic period.15 The large Corinthian capital from the porta regia is dated to this period by Stillwell and Heilmeyer.16 c. Inscriptions: The inscriptions found in the Theater include part of a thick revetment slab that records a dedication to an emperor whose name starts with H (see PI. 2:a) .17 This text reads: . .//ma] NTONIVS-AN [toni]. Given the archaeological context and [imp-] CAESARIH [adriano-aug. the letter forms, this is likely to refer to Hadrian rather than to Honorius. Further, the form of the titulature, which begins with Hadrianus, as in Hadrianus Augustus, rather than with Trajan's name, such as Traianus Hadrianus Augustus, suggests that the dedication derives from a period after early A.D. 123, when Hadrian dropped Trajan's names and titles on his coinage and named Augustus as his ancestor instead. This inscription was found in two parts, in the northeastern part of the stage building and in the lower cavea, and may have formed part of the dedicatory inscription. This text, then, may suggest a terminus post quem of A.D. 123 for this building and its architectural sculptures. Moreover, this date allows for the suggestion that the building was dedicated to Hadrian to coincide with his visit to Corinth in A.D. 124/5.18 Other fragmentary dedicatory plaques provide information about various aspects of this building campaign.19 For discussion of the inscriptions from the Theater and their significance for the chronology and dedication of the building, see pp. 45-49. 13. CorinthII, pp. 136-140. On Roman theaters, see Bieber 1961a, pp. 190-220; for theaters with curved exedrae in the scaenae frons, see Bieber's discussions of Aries, Orange, Augusta Emerita, Dougga, Sabratha, Palmyra, Bosra, and Miletos. On the period of the Corinth Theater's abandonment, see Williams and Zervos 1987, p. 31, and CorinthIX, ii, pp. 19, 130131, 136-137. More recently on the Gigantomachy: LIMC IV, p. 240, no. 481, s.v. Gigantes (Vian, Moore), all reconstruction drawings, pls. of slabs VI, XI; LIMC II, p. 310, no. 1065, s.v. Apollon (Lambrinoudakis); LIMCIV, p. 703, no. 373, s.v. Hera (Kossatz-Deissmann). On the Amazonomachy: Harrison 1981, pp. 292-293, 314, pl. 52, fig. 21, reconstruction of Amazonomachy Slab 7; LIMCI, p. 594, no. 116, s.v. Amazones (Devambez) (not illustrated). On the Herakles series: LIMCIV, p. 800, no. 1346, s.v. Herakles (Boardman), bull slab (not illustrated), dated 1st century B.C., "more probably a simple sacrifice scene than an episode on his return with the Cretan Bull"; LIMCV, p. 47, no. 2166, s.v. Herakles (Felten), boar slab, with Hadrianic date; p. 14, no. 1746, s.v. Herakles (Boardman). On the Peristyle Court, which had at least two phases, see CorinthII, pp. 13, 64-67; on the arch leading into the East Theater Plaza from the east, Williams and Zervos 1983, pp. 8-14, fig. 3; and on the gate across the north-south street, Williams and Zervos 1985, pp. 68-80, fig. 7. 14. Corinth II, pp. 75-82, 136. Stillwell excavated the post-

holes in 1948 as part of his preparation for publication. The descriptionof coin no. 2, foundJune 4,1948 (CorinthNB 112B, p. 118), reads: "Hadrian (bust r., laureate), probably from a Peloponnesian mint (fabric) (O. Zervos, 11/2/98)." See also MacIsaac1987, nos. 56, 57, 142, 144, for Hadrianiccoins from the Theater; no. 142 (26-1529), found in 1926, bears the legend HADRIANUSAUG Cos III PP/ Rev.: COLAA PATRENS(illus-

trated in SNGCop,vol. 17, no. 182, pl. 4). Although Hadrian was consul for the third time in A.D.119, he was not officially declared paterpatriae until A.D. 128; in A.D. 129 he assumes the

in the East. On the coin hoard found at the easttitle Olympios ern end of the PeristyleCourt, see Shear 1931a. The hoard is now being studied by A. Ajootian and 0. Zervos. 15. Saria 1938, fig. 32; Gebhard 1981. 16. CorinthII, pp. 117, 137, no. 107, figs. 90, 91; Heilmeyer 1970, p. 59, note 240, pl. 5:4. 17. CorinthVIII,iii, p. 50, no. 105, pl. 10. 18. Rizakis(1998, pp. 102-104) has pointed out the coincidence of dedications to Hadrian with his visits to Greece, as during his visitsof A.D.128/9 and 131/2, when he has the titles and Panhellenios, respectively.See also Boatwright2000, Olympios 206-207. pp. 19. CorinthVIII, iii, no. 101, may also form part of the Hadrianic dedication,

if [---ne]RVAE is taken to read "son of

6

INTRODUCTION

d. Sculpture: Some features of the sculptures are commensurate with the date suggested by the inscriptions. The best parallel is provided by the gorgoneion on a cuirassed statue of Hadrian from Corinth that is very similar to the head of Dionysos from the Gigantomachy reliefs.20 The colossal image of Trajan (1), probably shown in heroic seminudity, is likely to be a posthumous

portrait,judging by scale, draperyarrangement, and portrait type. The choice of Trajanfor the central figure rather than Augustus may suggest that the sculptural program was worked out prior to A.D. 123. The confronting griffins (5), which appear in relief above Trajan's image, recall the griffins employed in the portico around the column of Trajan in Rome.21 The hair of

the architecturalsculpturesis characterizedby a lack of drillwork,notable in the head of Helios (?) (6), the Silenos piers (11, 12), and most of the reliefs from the Theater. This technique contrasts sharply with the use of much greater drillwork in the architectural silenoi from the Theater of

Dionysos in Athens, which are dated to the Late Hadrianic to EarlyAntonine period.22 Some giants from the Theater reliefs (for instance, G8-1, G22, G23, and G26) are similar in style to architectural sculptures from Asia Minor of Hadrianic date, for example, busts from the

consoles of the portico of the Hadrianic Baths at Aphrodisias, and busts of Zeus and Apollo on capitals from the Temple of Apollo at Didyma. Figures from the Antonine Altar at Ephesos exhibit a more exaggerated style of carving, which corresponds with their later date.23 Figures in the Corinth Amazonomachy and Herakles Theater reliefs vary according to the style of models that they follow, but their manner of rendering seems consistent with that of the Gigan-

tomachy. Sculptures associated with the facade that exhibit proficient and continuous use of a drillthe statues of Antinous as Apollo Lykeios and Dionysos Kitharoidos (25, 26)-are dated between ca. A.D. 130 and 138. The portrait of Antinous was made between the time of his death in A.D. 130

and the end of Hadrian's reign in A.D. 138, and it also appears later than the main period of the sculptural assemblage on the facade on grounds of different technique and marble. It appears to have been added as a separate dedication after the scaenae frons had been completed. 5. Caracallanphase, early3rd centuryA.C. In this period (ca. A.D. 211-217) the Theater was trans-

formed into an arena for animal and gladiatorial combats. The lowest 10 rows of seats were removed and the pulpitum demolished to create a sunken pit. The parapet wall that was built around the pit was painted with gladiatorialscenes.24Any sculptures previouslydisplayed on the stage, in front of it, or in the orchestra or lower cavea areas would have been moved during this reworking. Nerva."See also CorinthVIII, iii, nos. 221/346, which nowjoin, nos. 336, 433, and below, pp. 47-49. The inscriptions are fragmentary,but there is no sign of an additional emperor'sname, such as Antoninus Pius. Moreover,there is an instance of PP (CorinthVIII,iii, p. 52, no. 113, pl. 11); if these nonjoining letters refer to Hadrian, they may indicate the year he was offi-

pp. 140-141, Late Hadrianic,ca. A.D. 140 at the latest. 23. Aphrodisias,busts of Medusa, Herakles, Perseus, and a Minotaur:Mendel 1912-1914, II, nos. 497-501. Didyma:Pfilz 1989, pp. 136-137 (Hadrianic date), pls. 15:1 (Zeus), 15:2 (Apollo); Kleiner 1949, p. 34 (date), figs. 18, 20, 21. For Ephesos, the date and format are controversial:Rosenbaum 1971,

cially named pater patriae in Rome, A.D. 127/8.

ca. A.D. 161-165; Vermeule 1968, p. 97, ca. A.D. 140; Eichler 1971 and Oberleitner 1978, p. 93, A.D. 169 or shortlyafter,and

20. The comparison to the Hadrian from the Corinth Odeion (S-1456) was first made by Broneer in CorinthX, pp. 125-127, fig. 120, and was later used by Capps to date the Gigantomachy reliefs (Capps 1938, pp. 546-548, fig. 7). See also de Grazia1973, pp. 308-312, no. 101, and Stemmer 1978, p. 51, no. IV 11, pl. 31:3,4. On the gorgoneion S-1456,cf. LIMC Romanae(Paoletti); Stemmer IV, p. 358, no. 173, s.v. Gorgones 1978, p. 51, no. IV 11, pl. 31:3. Unfortunately,the gorgoneion was stolen from the Corinth Museum in 1991, and its present whereabouts are unknown. On Dionysos, cf. CorinthIX, ii, no. G5-1. 21. Packer 1997, p. 336, no. 108, fig. 69; p. 345, no. 125, fig. 70; Kraus1967, p. 78. 22. Herbig 1935, pp. 10-14, 34-36, pls. 2-4; Despinis 2003,

Oberleitner restores as an altar.Cf. Hannestad 1986, pp. 201204, 397, note 225, for discussion of chronology, supporting a Late Hadrianic date, interpreting it as a representation of the adoptions of A.D. 138, and questioning the altar reconstruction. Cf.also Hannestad1974,Bonanno 1976.Forphotographs, see Eichler 1971 and Oberleitner 1978. 24. CorinthII, pp. 84-98, 140, figs. 76-83 (paintings), Williamsand Zervos1989, p. 36. Gladiatorialreliefsfrom 7:b; pl. mainland Greece are known from Patras, though they are funeraryand not from the theater (Rizakis1998, pp. 211-213, nos. 162-164, with references); cf. Athens, NM 4904, from Sparta (Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 127), 3rd century A.C.

HISTORY OF THE CORINTH THEATER

7

6. Tetrarchicphase, late 3rd centuryA.c.The final alteration saw the Theater redesigned. This

adaptation involved plastering the parapet wall, raising the orchestra floor level, and constructing a new, deeper Roman stage.25This additional reworkingof the stage, orchestra, and parodoi doubtless caused some movement of sculptures. Indeed, one effect of this disturbance was the removal of the togatus's right foot (34), which was found in a pit some considerable distance uphill and to the east, in the Peribolos of Apollo.26 Date of Destruction

Shear and Stillwell thought the Theater was destroyed during the invasion of Alaric in A.D.396, though activity continued elsewhere in the city through the first half of the 6th century A.C., as is

indicated by the portrait sculptures.27Their evidence for the Theater's destruction included the latest coins (from the period of Theodosius, A.D. 379-395), found in the drain at the point where it leaves the northeastern sector of the orchestra.28 More recently, however, Williams has pro-

posed that the earthquake of A.D.365 or 375 caused serious damage to the stage building, which was thereafter robbed for building blocks with some urgency in order to strengthen the city's defenses against the expected invasion of the Visigoths. There is no reason to suppose urgent robbing of these blocks thereafter, and pottery from the backfill of this robbing dates into the second quarter of the 5th century A.C.29Based on present evidence, the final period of use of the

Theater appears to have been in the third quarter of the 4th century A.C. The history of the excavations and the historical phases of the Theater have been presented in order to provide the necessarybackground for interpreting the findspots of the sculptures. The archaeological location of the sculptures is used in the reconstruction of sculptures and their placement on the scaenae frons presented here and in suggesting other areas within the building complex where sculptures may have been displayed. The findspots are critical for understanding the original context of the sculptures. Although the findspot designations used in the early excavations are usually far more general than they would be in modern excavations,a substantialnumber of pieces (65 out of 84) are provided with a section of the Theater as the place of discovery,while for 16, the general provenance of "Theater"is known. Sculptures found in the earliest excavations have the most general find indications, such as trench number alone, but the trench location may provide a meaningful association with a segment of the scaenae frons. Some areasof the Theater remain unexcavated:most of the western half of the PeristyleCourt, the room north of the west parodos, parts of the cavea, and the orchestrafloor beneath the Late Roman levels, except for its center, as well as the western area corresponding to East Theater Plaza and the street west of the Theater. Nonetheless, information as to the deposition of the pieces catalogued here allows a reconstruction of the sculptures on the facade and of others throughout the architectural complex. The catalogue presents the sculptures in groups that reflect the general area of discovery-over the scaenae frons, in the orchestra to cavea area, in each of the parodoi, in the PeristyleCourt, and in the East Theater Plaza-on the grounds that their meaning derives as much from their location and their relationship to other sculptures on the facade or in other parts of the building complex as from their particularsubjects. The sculptures catalogued here stem from the EarlyHellenistic through Late Roman periods, with most of the Hellenistic pieces coming from Shear's excavation east of the Theater. The 25. CorinthII, p. 140; Williams and Zervos 1985, p. 76. Retzleff (2001) has shown for Near Eastern theaters that no evidence supports the theory that they were designed for water shows in the Late Roman period, so this assumption needs to be reexamined for Corinth. 26. The foot was deposited in the pit in the Peribolos of

Apollo by A.D. 300 (Slane 1994, pp. 127-128). 27. On Constantinianand laterportraits,see de Grazia1973, head nos. 50-60, 62-64; statue nos. 88, 89 (here 54), 90-95; and bust no. 113. 28. CorinthII, pp. 140-141; Shear 1928b, pp. 476, 479. 29. Williamsand Zervos1987, p. 31.

INTRODUCTION

8

majority of the Roman pieces appear to date from the first half of the 2nd century A.C., though earlier and later examples indicate that freestanding sculpture in the ensemble was of an additive nature. Some earlier statues were retained and reused in the Hadrianic grouping, presumably because they represented a popular athletic type, such as the Doryphoros (20), or were important to the history of the city, as the Isthmian official or victor (27), the Tiberian private portrait (28), and the togatus (34). The latest period of the Theater's use, determined on the basis of coins to be toward the end of the 4th century A.C.,is corroborated by the presence of two Late Roman statues (54, 55). After the Theater went out of use, ca. A.D. 365-375, it was subject to considerable looting of blocks for building the city's fortifications against the impending attack of Alaric (A.D. 396), and later for lime.30 In view of the fact that few architectural elements from the facade and almost none of the seats from the Roman theater survive, it is remarkable that so many of the sculptures construction.

are preserved.

30. Williams and Zervos 1987, p. 31.

Presumably they were rejected as poorly shaped for wall

1

SCULPTURAL DECORATION IN THE CORINTH THEATER

PREVIOUS RECONSTRUCTIONS he Reliefsfrom the Theater(CorinthIX, ii) presented the Gigantomachy, the Amazonomachy, nd the Labors of Herakles. These three subjects were associated with the three levels of the scaenae frons, following the reconstruction by Stillwell (in CorinthII), which had been based on the prescriptions

of Vitruvius (5.6.6-7);

on surviving architectural

fragments of three dimin-

ishing sizes, especially column and cornice fragments; and on comparisons with the well-preserved theater facades at Orange and Sabratha.1 The Gigantomachy slabs were assigned to the first story because they are taller than the other two, and because their height (G21, ca. 0.98 m) corresponds closely to that of the podia supporting the first-level columns. The average height of the Amazonomachy slabs (0.816 m) corresponds to the restored height of the podia on the second story, though the length of the slabs being greater than their height (unlike the dimensions of the Gigantomachy) suggests that they

occupied the spaces between the podia rather than directly beneath the columns. This location, where nothing would have stood above them, would also accommodate

more easily the variabil-

ity in the height of the Amazonomachy slabs (from 0.765 m [slab 4] to 0.880 m [slab 5]) .2 The Herakles reliefs, finally, are placed across the top story, as the figures' scale is generally smaller and the restored heights of the slabs slightly less than those of the Amazonomachy series (slab 9, 0.778; slab 11, 0.832; average H. 0.81 m). In addition, the Herakles series is in many cases more fragmentary than the other two, having fallen a greater distance, though the pattern of breakage may have been affected by the direction in which the building fell.3 Reexamination of the sculptures from the early excavations of the Theater adds to our evidence of the decoration of the facade and the Theater complex. The best-preserved sculptures from the Theater have long been known and are on exhibit in the Archaeological Museum in Ancient Corinth. Many of the more fragmentary pieces, housed in the museum storerooms, can be associated with the Theater only on the evidence of notations penctionsiled on the stones, entries and sketches in excavation notebooks, orjoins with pieces known to come from the Theater. The picture that has emerged is more complex and more informative than previous conceptions about Corinth's self-identification as a Roman city and about sculptural assemblages in theaters in the 2nd century A.C. SCULPTURES ON THE SCAENAE FRONS It can now be suggested that five areas of the scaenae frons in addition to the column podia were decorated with marble sculptures: the four niches, the podia for the niches, the three pediments,

the uppercolumns,and the intercolumniationsof the firststory.The niche figures,pedimental 1. Stillwell in CorinthII, pp. 99-105, 111-130. 2. Such an application of reliefs between podia in the second story of a columnar structure recalls the reliefs from the

Sebasteion at Aphrodisias (Smith 1987, 1988b, 1990b). 3. CorinthIX, ii, pp. 131-135.

10

SCULPTURAL DECORATION

IN THE CORINTH THEATER

busts, relief heads, and griffin plaque draw attention to the three projections that articulate the structure vertically; the figures in the intercolumniations and the Silenos piers reinforce the vertical elements of the architecture; and the mythological reliefs emphasize the horizontal planes of the facade. The addition of a large figure in the central niche, the increased size of the central door, and the location of a pedimental bust in the third story provide the building with a strong central axis and symmetry (Plans III, IV). FIGURES

IN THE FOUR NICHES

Three niches are located over the porta regia and the hospitalia in the second story, and there is one over the porta regia in the third. The niches of the second and third stories contained sculpture in the round, set into a frame of architectural reliefs, busts, and piers. The biggest niche, in the center of the second story, held the largest figure. Two pieces of this statue (1) are recognizable: the top and back of the head, which derives from a figure about twice life-size, and part of a colossal left hand holding some drapery and an object. Although the head (1A) is composed of four fragments that were stored in four different marble piles, it can be assigned to the Theater based on the similarity of the lower face to an excavation notebook drawing. It can be associated with the center of the stage building based on the findspot of the left side of the head. The hand (1B) is associated with the Theater through a penciled indication on it of its findspot in the central orchestra. The statue, identified as Trajan, is assigned to the central niche because of its identification as an imperial portrait and its colossal scale. This architectural location has analogies in other Roman theaters that may preserve an imperial portrait from the central niche, such as those atVolterra in central Italy, Orange in southern France, Carthage and Dougga in North Africa, and Ephesos in the East.4 The portrait of Trajan was probably seated, semidraped, with the left hand resting on the thigh and the right arm raised holding a sceptera pose that recalls images ofJupiter. With an imperial statue assigned to the large central niche, the next question is whether this statue formed part of an imperial group. Two additional figures could have been set up in the niches over the hospitalia and one in the smaller niche in the third story over the porta regia. A standing figure of appropriate scale for the eastern niche is the semidraped male figure wearing a mantle draped around the hips (2). Segments of this sculpture were found in 1926 and 1928, its main part over the eastern end of the stage, just north of the end of the east parodos, and the statue support in the square recession behind the east hospitalium. As both parts were found in close proximity to the eastern hospitalium, the statue is assigned to the niche over this doorway. To correspond with this male figure positioned in the niche over the eastern hospitalium, a female figure is likely for the western one. The best candidate for this niche is the draped female statue 3. This statue is composed of two parts: its upper torso (3A) was found in 1929 at a relatively high level near the west end of the stage, one meter below the top of the buttress at the east entrance to the west parodos; and the draped legs (3B) were discovered in 1903 and 1909 in the west-central part of the scaenae frons, a little above stage level. The quality of work on this figure is commensurate with that of the mantle figure (2). The scale, which is somewhat over life-size, makes the figure well suited for display in the western niche, and the classical-style drapery is appropriate for an empress depicted in the guise of a goddess. This leaves one niche empty: the central one of the third story. Given its height, it is not surprising that no well-preserved figure survives that would be an appropriate candidate for this 4. Fuchs (1987, pp. xiii-xiv) suggests that the central niche is reserved for use by the emperor. Volterra: Fuchs 1987, pp. 100, 166; Rose 1997a, p. 126, no. 51, pl. 154. Orange (Arausio): Bieber 1961a, pp. 200-201, figs. 675-679; Esperandieu XII, no. 7979. Carthage, Antonine phase (possible statues of Lucius Verus and Marcus Aurelius in second-story niches, later replaced

by statues of Apollo, Hercules, and Dionysos): Ros 1996, pp. 484-489. Dougga: Carton 1902, pl. 10:1, 2; Pfeiffer 1931, p. 154, frontispiece, pl. 15:3; Bejor 1979, p. 44; Fuchs 1987, p. 177. Ephesos: Smith 1997, pp. 173, 189. On Early Imperial family groups, see Rose 1997a, esp. pp. 3, 10, 22, 31, and CollinsClinton 2000 on the group from the Odeum at Cosa.

SCULPTURES ON THE SCAENAE FRONS

11

position. One small fragment, however, presents an intriguing possibility,a gorgoneion in low relief, which derives from the chest of a cuirassed statue of substantial size (4). The measurements of the gorgon head, based on comparison with cuirassed figures at Corinth, yield a restored height for the statue of ca. 2.10-2.20 m. This piece was discovered in 1929 in the western part of the scaenae frons, wedged into the Roman concrete foundations. The gorgoneion, together with associated fragments, indicates the statue was of a living ruler wearing parade military costume; given the period indicated by other evidence, this is most likely Hadrian. SCULPTURE

ON THE PODIA

FOR THE NICHES

The podia below and above the central niche would have been somewhat larger than the side podia. Whatever was placed in such a central location would probably have contributed to the overall significance of the figures in the two niches over the porta regia (1, 4). The primary candidate for one of these podia positions is a segment from a long rectangular relief with two confronting griffins (5), carved on a thin revetment slab that would have been clamped onto thick backer blocks. The findspots for this thin slab, in trench 34 over the central stage (see Plan

I), indicate that it occupied a central location, and the unusual degree of fragmentation suggests that it was employed in the upper podium over the porta regia. The wing fragments that survive are flat and stylized,but the bodies of these figures probablywould have projected in bold relief. The most likely candidates for the podia below the side niches are two relief heads (9, 10) about three times life-size,which project in high relief from large architecturalblocks. The highrelief heads appear to be designed as a pendant pair, a fact that may suggest restoration over paired entrances into the Theater, such as the versuraeat the sides of the stage or the parodoi.5 The Corinth heads are larger than reliefs on keystones, however,and they project from architectural members with no trace of curves. Moreover,both were discovered over the middle of the scaenae frons. The female head (9) and part of the hair of its male companion (10C) were found in 1902 in trench 34, which runs over the central part of the stage building, while other fragments from 10 were found dispersed in the trenches from 1903-1910, as if they had fallen from a great height. The female relief head, possibly a Nereid, may be positioned on the podium of the second story over the western hospitalium door, and the male head, possibly Triton, in the corresponding position over the eastern hospitalium. No reliefs surviveon any curved blocks from the Corinth Theater facade, so it is assumed that only the straight elements on the facade received sculpted decoration, while the curved ele-

ments leading back to the three doors remained plain. Such an approach to allocating sculpture would have emphasized the tridimensionalityof the architecture, an aspect further enhanced by the contrast of light and shadow across the facade, which would have changed with the movement of the sun and clouds. Only decoration on the forwardsections would be in sunlight and visible, while the recessed curves would be in shadow. BUSTS IN THE THREE PEDIMENTS

Partsof three busts are assigned to the pediments. The upper and lower partsof two over life-size male busts (6, 7), found during Shear's excavations, appear designed for architecturaluse, and they correspond in scale with a large female bust (8), once in the Old Museum courtyard.A drawing in a Theater notebook verifies the female bust's association with the Theater and indicates the findspot, somewhatbehind the easterndoor and about 3.5 m above the curvedorthostate blocks. The elevated findspot supports iitlocation in the pediment over the eastern hospitalium, a space with which its measurements coincide. Of the male busts, 6 is placed in the central 5. Cf. sculptural pairs over paired entrances at Myra (KrienKummrow 1975, pi. 22) and Capua (Pesce 1941, pp. 41-43).

SCULPTURAL DECORATION

12

IN THE CORINTH THEATER

pediment on the upper story and 7 is situated in the third pediment, over the western hospitalium,

a location that corresponds to the findspot of one segment of it in cavea section VII, possibly the orchestra slightlywest of center. The lower and rear surfaces of all three busts are worked flat, which suggests an architectural use. Cuttings in the upper rear surfaces of heads 6 and 8 indicate the location for metal clamps

that would have secured the busts in place, probably assisted by clamps in the lower surfaces to hold them securely in an elevated location. SILENOI ON Two PIERS

Marble silenoi, carved in high relief on two piers, also formed part of the sculptural assemblage attached to the architecture of the Corinth scaenae frons. Fragments attest to only two silenoi

(11, 12). These would likely have formed a pair, an aspect reflected in the opposing three-quarter poses of their heads, probably facing the central axis. They were found in trench 34 over the

central stage building. Their scale, somewhat over life-size, corresponds to the size of columns on the third story. Given the sparse survival of architectural members from the upper levels,

however,it is difficult to be certain of their precise location. STATUES

IN THE

INTERCOLUMNIATIONS

OF THE

FIRST

STORY

In addition to the imperial group in the niches, there were likely freestanding statues located between the first-story columns, for a substantial number of sculpture fragments were found on the stage or immediately before it. For most, the notations of findspot are unspecific, but the

year of excavation or the broad indication of "west,""near the center,"or "east"aids in reconstruction. Suggestions presented here as to the general nature and appearance of the decorated

facade are more certain than are specific allocations or identities of individual statues. An attempt at reconstruction is justified, however, because the meaning of the sculptures was derived both from affiliation with the large group and subgroups and from individual subjects and styles. The particular statuary types or the period-styles of possible models may be of little significance,

except insofar as they provided a means of reading the subject as a whole. One tentative element of the reconstruction is the possible association of nonjoining frag-

ments, which is crucial evidence for the total number of statues represented as well as their identifications. We cannot be sure what was actually placed on the facade in Hadrianic times, only what is associated with the scene building just prior to its destruction. Moreover,it is often difficult to discern, due in part to the fragmentary state of the remains, which sculptures were

reused from earlier phases of the Theater decoration, which were employed in the decoration of the Hadrianic building phase, and which may have been added subsequently. The statues that stood between the columns on the first story comprise a series of deities and well-known heroes. Some may have been related to important local cults, others to the kinds of

contests that would have taken place onstage, to victories that were celebrated, or to the subject of dramatic events. The deities may have included Aphrodite, Ares, Artemis, Athena, Herakles, Dionysos, and Pan. At each end of the stage were probably groups that included an equine figure: a Dioskouros(?) and horse at left, Chiron and a young musician at right. Additions to the assemblage in the intercolumniations are Antinous as Apollo and Dionysos Kitharoidos in the porta regia and possibly a heroic portrait in the western hospitalium. Of these sculptures, two, the Doryphoros (20) and Chiron (23), are notably less finished on the back, and two, the portrait of Livia(?) (3) and the Herakles hip herm (22), present a uniformly high finish and more detail on the back. It is unclear whether the degree of finish on the

back of certain pieces indicates a practice of the carver or whether it was motivated by the intended location. The pattern of joins in relation to findspots is informative. A few fragments from the Theater reliefs that were found in or near the northeast Peristyle Court join some excavated from the

stage area, suggesting that the scaenae frons fell to the northeast. The Silenos piers demonstrate

SCULPTURES WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

13

a similarpattern ofjoining, for while most pieces with recorded findspots come from the central stage (1 A, 11B, lE, 1 F, 12B, 12C, 12F), 12D was found in the PeristyleCourt at the north end of the passage between the court and East Theater Plaza. One fragment from one of the freestanding sculptures, the statue of a man wearing calcei with metal tassels (38), found in the central stage building,joins one from EastTheater Plazaand is associatedwith another from the orchestra. Some figures were found reused as building blocks or otherwise in clearly secondary positions, like the mantle statue (68) and the head of Dionysos(?) (77). THE BUILDING DEDICATION Pausanias (2.4.5) mentions the Theater, but he does not discuss the building or its decoration, except for the naked wooden statue of Herakles beside it that he associates with Daidalos. He also makesno mention of the primarydeity(ies) of the Theater.The Hellenisticaltarof Dionysos(?) (50) and the statues of Dionysos (26, 44), satyrs(45, 46), and Priapus (48) make it reasonable to suppose that the Theater was associated with Dionysos, as is discussed below (pp. 26-27). In the 2nd-century phase of the building, which was marble, the dedication of the scaenae frons was displayed in Latin on the frieze portion of the architrave-friezeblocks. Partsof several words survive:CAESAR, AR, and METRO.6 Stillwellassigned these blocks to locations over the three doors leading through the porta regia and hospitalia. As the emperor is named on one block and part of the Greekword metropolis, in Latin letters, may also occur, the emperor and the city or the people of the city may be the focus of the dedication. In the 2nd-centuryB.C. theater at Iasos, an analemma, the cavea section next to it, and the stage are dedicated to Dionysos and the people; the late-ist-century north parodos of the theater at Pergamon is dedicated to Dionysos KareoyO sWv) and to the people; and the vault of the upper entrance to the Kathegemon (ALO6vuoo theater at Ephesos is dedicated to the people.7 In the Roman theater at Miletos the dedication to Nero, the Didymean Apollo, and the demoswas displayed over the central door on two superimposed architraveblocks, while the city of Ephesos records its dedication to Ephesian Artemis and to Nero on the architraveof the scaenae frons of A.D.66.8 Additional dedicatory inscriptions of this or other parts of the Theater complex at Corinth were set up on revetment plaques on flat stretches of wall. The plaques were found concentrated in two areas, the lower cavea to orchestra area and the PeristyleCourt, and they may have been set up in those locations. One set may have been attached to the wall over the entrances to the cavea from the parodoi, the other to the wall of the PeristyleCourt.9 SCULPTURES WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX The largest concentration of freestanding figures with known provenance was over the stage (22 pieces). The remainder were distributedin the cavea (8), the orchestra (3), the east parodos (5), the west parodos (6), the PeristyleCourt (4), and EastTheater Plaza (4). Additional statuarywas discovered outside the Theater complex in East Theater Street (4) and east of East Theater Street (3). Freestanding figures known to have come from the Theater, but to which none of these area designations can be assigned, number only seven. 6.

CAESAR:

CorinthVIII, ii, p. 25, no. 35; Stillwell in Corinth

II, pp. 114, 116, no. 90, fig. 88. ARI: CorinthII,pp. 114, 116, no. 91, fig. 88.

METRO:

CorinthII, pp. 114, 116, no. 92, fig. 88. See

P1.l:g-i. 7. Iasos: Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 69-74; IV, Appendix II, p. 229, no. 24. Pergamon: Radt 1988, pp. 291292; AvPVIII, i, p. 136, no. 236; Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 23-34. Ephesos: Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, IV, Appendix II, p. 212, no. 12. 8. Miletos: Milet VI, ii, pp. 119, 120, no. 928. Ephesos:

Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 47-66; IV, Appendix II, pp. 213, 214, no. 13. 9. Found in the lower cavea to orchestra area: CorinthVIII, iii, p. 50, no. 105 (P1. 2:a); 1-2302/2391 (Corinth VIII, iii, pp. 152-153, no. 433), joined to 1-2357 (pp. 137-138, no. 346d) and 1-2774 (P1. 2:b); 1-251 (CorinthVIII, i, p. 54, no. 71),joined to 1-2294 (Corinth VIII, iii, p. 13, no. 41) (P1. 2:c); 1-356 and I357/1899 (CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 94-95, no. 221a, b),joined to I2337, 1-2351 (pp. 137-138, no. 346a) (P1. 2:d). Found in the Peristyle Court: CorinthVIII, iii, p. 135, no. 336 (P1. 2:e).

14

SCULPTURAL DECORATION

IN THE CORINTH THEATER

The sculptures unearthed within the Theater complex are considered here. One figure (34) presents the unusual example of a statue excavated from the Theater whose foot was found elsewhere, having been broken off in some disturbance, conveyed southeast and uphill from the Theater, and buried there in a "garbage dump" of the Tetrarchic period located in the Peribolos of Apollo. The statue, a togatus, appears to have continued in use until it was built into a late cross-wall near the east parodos inner entrance. As was apparently the case with this togatus, the elimination of the stage when the arena was constructed in the early 3rd century A.C.would have caused the movement of some statuary to new display areas or their reuse for other purposes. In addition, statuary may have been pulled out of the way in the late 4th century A.C., when workmen sought out architectural blocks and more suitable sculptures to use in building the city's defensive fortifications. Evidence for the intentional breaking of a block of architectural sculpture can be seen on the medallion frame of the Triton head (10). This kind of activity explains the disappearance of much of the architecture and also of large segments of the Theater sculpture. Moreover, notebook notations of findspots in the Corinth Theater are not always clear. For example, the designation "cavea, section VIII, 1 meter above orchestra level" appears to indicate the orchestra before the arena wall, rather than the cavea proper, for many such designations derive from the 1926 excavations when no work was carried out in the cavea. Despite these problems, the distribution of findspots seems to illustrate the positions of the sculptures in their respective sections of the Theater complex. Records of findspots have been used in conjunction with trench plans to help determine the locations of the finds (see Plan I for the location of trench and year designations, where known). ON STAGE OR AT ENTRANCES

TO PARODOI

Eight possible portraits (27-34) were found in the general area of the orchestra, the east end of the stage, or near the inner entrances to the parodoi. Five of these are of pre-Hadrianic date. It is noteworthy, therefore, that they were retained in the Theater at least until the 3rd century A.C., when one (28) was used as packing under the late orchestra floor and another (34) was built into a wall. They were probably displayed in the theater of the 2nd century A.C., perhaps in the stage wings or in the orchestra in front of the stage in order to make way for the new scaenae frons and new dedications. The calcei on one figure found before the east end of the scaenae frons (38) suggest it was a portrait, and the metal tassels point to the figure's importance. A small figure of Dionysos (44) was found in 1903 over the central stage. As it is of a much smaller scale than the other sculptures found on the stage, the figure may have once stood in another location and been moved to the back of the stage during the arena period. ORCHESTRA

TO LOWER CAVEA

In the orchestra to lower cavea areas, parts of five life-size statues appeared. Three (32, 33, 39) are certainly portraits; the others (36, 40) are too fragmentary to identify as portraits. Two small statues of satyrs (45, 46) were probably also found in this location, and their small size may suggest that they were moved up into the cavea in the arena period from locations in the orchestra, perhaps in front of the stage. Two marble statuettes, probable adjuncts of Aphrodite and Asklepios, were also found in this general area (48, 49); since they are too small to have been displayed here, they were probably dropped by a participant in a Theater activity. Two altars were found in the orchestra: the Hellenistic one to Dionysos(?) (50), which was apparentlyjoined by an altar to Apollo (51) in the Augustan period. In the earlier Roman theater, some herms were set up, possibly along the lower rim of the cavea, at the ends of the cavea or stage, or across the stage front. One portrait head (28) and one

SCULPTURES WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

15

herm shaft (47), possibly of Dionysos or Hermes, remain from such an arrangement, perhaps coming from two pairs or a series of herms. When the Theater was converted into the 3rd-century A.C. arena, the front of the stage was eliminated, and this may have been when the herms

were discarded. UPPER CAVEA

The torso from a Late Roman portrait (54) was found between the diazoma and the back wall of the cavea, probably having fallen forward from a location in the colonnade at the top of the

cavea. The forearm and hand from a second Late Roman portrait (55) was found at a high level above the west parodos, perhaps fallen from the upper cavea or upper colonnade. EAST PARODOS

Parts of five sculptures were found in the east parodos, a chance survivalgiven their size. They are smaller in scale than those in the west parodos. Represented are a small statue of Dionysos (56); two statuettes, one of which may represent Ganymede (57, 58); a votive relief to Kybele (59); and a larger relief, which may be reused from an earlier monument on the end of the back wall of the scaenae frons (60). Williams considers the eastern entrance to the Theater more important than the west for three reasons: the east side has a colonnaded street leading to it; two gates control the entrance to the east parodos and EastTheater Plaza;and the EastTheater Plazais paved with a hard stone that shows little wear, the so-called Acrocorinthian limestone, rather than the soft, cheap limestone laid at the entrance to the west parodos. At present no major sculpturaldedications survive from the eastern entrance. WEST PARODOS

Two statues of Dionysos, at least life-size, were found near the outer entrance to the west parodos,

on the north side. The location of these statues is indicated by the findspots of their marble supports: one a panther head (61), the other a tree trunk overgrownwith ivy and grapes (62). Aphrodite appears in a smaller dedication at the inner entrance to the west parodos (63). A statuette representing Hygieia (65) was also found in the west parodos, near the eastern end. It could have been displayed in a niche or dropped by a person coming up from the sanctuary of Asklepios and Hygieia, located a short distance to the north. Although the excavated finds are

limited, they show that Dionysoswould have functioned as a primary"greeter"at this entrance to the Theater. PERISTYLE COURT Evidence

for some relatively large sculptures

survives from the Peristyle Court, where ample

room was availablefor the displayof statuary.This court was unpaved and may have contained a garden as well as a fountain on the south side.10Found at the east end was a large sculpture of an Amazon, possibly representing a female victor (67), and a male statue wearing a hip-mantle, possiblyan imperial portraitof the Antonine period (68). A tall base with feet from a small statue survives,probablyfrom a trapezophoros (70). In addition, a base for a bronze statue of a boy actor (71), LuciusVibius Florus,who won many victories in contests at Argos, Corinth, Sikyon, and Epidauros, was discovered in this area. The

10. Such a garden is reminiscent of the porticus of the Theater of Pompey in Rome; see Gleason 1994 and Kuttner 1999.

SCULPTURAL DECORATION

16

IN THE CORINTH THEATER

inscribed base records that his father set up the statue with the approval of the city council. Further, four fragments from the crown of a possible victory stele, with prize crowns across the top in relief, came to light (72). The fragments were dispersed laterally across the back of the stage building, making it difficult to tell where the monument was erected, though perhaps it was within the south colonnade of the Peristyle Court. EAST THEATER PLAZA

Parts of two large statues were discovered in East Theater Plaza. One is the almost life-size statue of Hermes (74). A bronze finger (75) indicates the presence of a life-size statue in this area, one of only two surviving indications of bronze statuary in the Theater complex (cf. the statue of Vibius [71]), both in the Theater courtyards rather than in the Theater proper. A small bust, possibly of Antoninus Pius (73), was discovered in the drain behind East Theater Plaza, where it appears to have been dropped. In addition, the portrait of a woman (76) was found near the Byzantine cistern north of the east parodos. EAST THEATER

STREET

Four figures were found in East Theater Street. The life-size portrait bust of a woman (78) was unearthed in 1982. As the findspot is located opposite one of the buttresses on the outer cavea wall, this portrait may have been set up in a niche in the cavea wall and may commemorate a woman for her beneficence in funding work on some part of the Theater. In addition, fragments of three statuettes (79-81) appeared in the excavations of East Theater Street. They may or may not be related to the Theater. Some statuary from the Early Roman phases of the Theater appears, based on the findspots, to have been reused in the Hadrianic phase. Such reuse can be credited to the convenience of these sculptures' presence in the Theater and their continued appropriateness to the context. The reuse of earlier statuary, such as the replica of the Doryphoros (20), in the Hadrianic sculptural assemblage is comparable to the use of spolia in Late Roman monuments.1l This reuse also highlights the additive nature of sculptural assemblages in large public buildings. ANALYSIS OF THE FINDS SCALE

AND

TYPES

The sculptural assemblage includes works of varied scales and types. Each of the sculptures appears to have been chosen for its subject matter and for the way it fits into the overall assemblage. The selection for this public complex differs from the more random choices described for some private collections (Lucian, Philops. 18). The Theater's most popular ideal statue, the Doryphoros (20), is included possibly because it was a well-known athletic type and the statue was available. Although the reconstruction may be affected by the fragmentary state of preservation, a few of the other large-scale works, 19, 22, and 24, which date from the 2nd century A.C., can be associated with well-known and widely distributed types. The Doryphoros, which derives from a Peloponnesian bronze of ca. 450 B.C., may have been paired with another athletic figure, the Monteverde youth (19), which derives from an Attic bronze of about the same date. Careful reproduction of specific details in the latter may suggest renewed interest in a particular bronze in Hadrianic Athens or in Classical bronzes in general, and that the model stood in a place accessible to Roman sculptors. 11. On interest in spolia in Roman monuments, see Holloway 1985 and Brenk 1987.

ANALYSIS OF THE FINDS

17

In her study of sculpturalassemblagesin theaters in the Roman West,M. Fuchs has suggested that there is a far greater percentage of portrait than ideal sculpture set up in theaters in the West.12At Corinth, the problem of survivalof the sculptures affects such statistics,and the finds are too fragmentaryto make a definitivestatementregardingsuch percentages. Smith has pointed out that at Aphrodisias the earlier phases of the theater had more ideal statuarythan portraits, and a similar pattern may have obtained at Corinth.13At Corinth it is significant that portraits appear to have been concentrated in the orchestra to cavea area. Some 38 freestanding figureswere carvedon a scale approximatelylife-sizeor somewhatover.14 Two are on a slightly smaller scale, though possibly life-size (youth of Monteverde type [19], Hermes [74]). Another category is formed by works about one-third life-size, and there are a number of statuettes.With the larger figures the height may be related to position on the architecture or to subject. The under life-size figures and statuettes are not of standardizedsizes. Five figures are roughly one-third life-size. Only one of these (44) was found over the stage; two (45, 46) were found in the orchestraor lower cavea area, perhaps having been moved during the Theater's transformationinto an arena in the early 3rd century A.C.;the rest were found in a secondary context (77) or outside the Theater (94). Although none of these appears to be the same size, most figures about one-third life-size are of Dionysiac subjects,representing Dionysos or a satyr. The statuettes are mostly smaller than 0.20 m. They were found in and in front of the stage building, in the cavea, the parodoi, East Theater Street, and east of the Theater. As with the figures about one-third life-size, these vary considerably in size as well as in quality.Of the 12 statuettes, seven derive from Aphrodite or related subjects (41, 42, 48, 64, 79, 80, 91), while the others include Hygieia (65), Isis (88), Telesphoros (49), and unknown subjects (89, 90). TECHNICAL

FEATURES

AND PIECING

A number of features of the Corinth Theater sculptures are interesting for technical reasons. Bosses used for measuring can be recognized with certaintyon several pieces. The Silenos fragment 1IE has a worn, rounded element with a pinhole, located near the bottom of the leg on the central front. This projection indicates that the Silenos piers were created using a model. Systematic measuring would have facilitated production of a statuarypair of similarheights. The unfinished statue of a Dacian in Rome, which was intended to be one of a large number of statues of similar format in the Forum of Trajan,exhibits multiple measuring bosses, organized along a series of vertical lines.'5 The fragmentary horse (13) from the Corinth Theater preserves the remains of a similar boss in the central front of the chest. A sharp hole pierces the middle of a low circular depression; most of the projection has been smoothed away.There is no indication that there was more than one horse, so the practice of using such measuring bosses at Corinth may be particularto large-scalefigures that are in the round or nearly so. No certain measuring bosses are identifiable on the reliefs from the Theater, although one fragment contains two small holes at the point of its greatest projection, which might have served that purpose.'6 A recarving or adaptation is exemplified by 1A, the head of Trajan.From the tool marks,it is clear that a thick wreath from the initial carvingwas at some time removed. The head may have 12. Fuchs 1987, pp. 185, 188. 13. Smith 1991, p. 97. 14. For figures, the following terms are generally used to indicate approximate scale: life-size = roughly 5-6 feet, based on an estimated average height in antiquity of 5 feet 4 inches, or ca. 1.65 m; colossal = over twice life-size, or over 3.0 m in height; medium-sized = ca. three-quarters life-size, or from about 1-1.5 m in height; small scale or statuette = less than 1.0 m in height. For more fragmentary pieces, any indication of scale must be considered an estimate. On sizing, see Angel 1945 and

Kane and Carrier1988. 15. Dacian,VaticanMuseums:Waelkens1985, p. 646, fig. 6. For other measuring bosses, cf. the didactic male torso from Aquileia (Scrinari1972, no. 1); the head of "Eubouleus"from the Athenian Agora (Harrison 1960b, pp. 382-389); and the Diskophoros from Aphrodisias (Rockwell 1991, pp. 134, 136, 142, fig. 11). FromCorinth,cf. the portraitof Domitian, S-2272 (de Grazia1973, p. 124). 16. CorinthIX, ii, no. H6-3, pl. 73 (here 5F).

SCULPTURAL DECORATION

18

IN THE CORINTH THEATER

been adapted from a late, wreathed portrait of Trajan, and featured posthumously as the central

element in the Hadrianic scaenae frons. Some sculptures were intentionally cut up for reuse as building blocks. The torso of a draped male figure (24) was cut in two, the survivingportion dressed with a heavypoint at the waist.The lower torso of an Aphrodite statue, sawn into halves, was built into a wall in the East of Theater area.17Other pieces were found built into architecturalcontexts without any recutting, such as the Tiberian private portrait (28), the togatus (34), and the Antonine mantle statue (68). It can occasionallybe observed that architecturalsculpturesin the Theater were affixed to the facade in a manner analogous to the frieze blocks. Twoof the busts,Helios(?) (6) and Demeter(?) (8), preserve large clamp cuttings for this purpose in the central top surface near the back, and on 8, probablyalso at the bottom break. The high-relief heads of Nereid (or Aphrodite) (9) and Triton (10), on the other hand, were built into the construction as thick architecturalblocks. Of the figures in the niches, Augustus(?) (2) was clamped onto a base by a cutting at the back of the tree trunk, while for Livia(?) (3), two clamp cuttings to fix the statue to a base remain on the plinth: one beneath the right heel, the other on the rear left side, neither visible from the front. A large dowel also affixed the portrait of a Roman (28) to a herm. A moderate amount of piecing exists among sculptures restored on the scaenae frons. This occurs in the pedimental busts (7, the outer right shoulder); the high-relief heads (possibly 9, tail and attachment hole for dolphin body); the the head; 10B, large hair segment with dolpattachin Silenos piers (1 C, small draperyedge); and the niche figures (iB, hand; 4E, leg; and 4F, foot). Of these the most surprisingis the possible attachment of the head 9 to the high relief. A flaw in the marble may have necessitated this rather risky solution. The head was deeply set into the block to ensure stability, where it likely broke along the line of the clamp cutting. The shoulder

edge of 7 is carefully secured by two dowels and the dolphin attached to O1Bwith one. For the draperysegment of 1IC, no dowel is used, but ratherthe piece wasglued to a verysmooth surface. Reliefs from the scaenae frons also show moderate piecing using marble. Hands (CorinthIX, ii, nos. G39, G42, G49, G61, A21, H6-2), a thumb (A9-6), arms (G126, A8), feet (G25-3), drapery

(G120), a plinth (U34), weapons (A21), and helmet crests (G15-1, Gil-1, A8) are attached. Some additions may be due to the height of the relief (pelta shield tip, A6-1) or to repairs (shield

edges, A10-2, A14-2), while others allowed for attaching a few weapons in metal (short sword, G20-2; G33-1, G58, G59). Since many weapons were carved in marble, it would seem that an effort was made to keep costs down, due to the size and expense of the project. In addition, it is significant that metal additions seem to occur only in the Gigantomachyon the first story,where they would be more readilyapparent to the viewer.Here, too, Poseidon's head (G24-1) has holes for the attachment of a metal wreath, giving him more emphasis than Zeus (G13-1), who also wears a fillet.

Among the freestanding sculptures,the types of attachmentsare generally those characteristic of marble sculptures.The horse torso (13A) wasattached to the head at the base of the neck, and hands are attached at the wrists (14A, 14B, 34) or farther up the arm (44). Hand or arm attachments are masked by draperywhere possible (14A, 34, 67), but the nude arm of the Doryphoros (20B) is attached to the wristand pinned to the side of the torso.Joining surfacesof the latter are flat, but the Late Roman hand 55 exhibits a projecting marble tenon at the wrist.The figure that is possibly a young musician (24), which is relativelysmall and of poor quality,exhibits many cuttings forjoins as well as unusual means for their attachments.Verticaland horizontal dowels affixed the hand; an object carried against the arm was made separately,possiblyof metal; and a large attribute was fitted along vertical surfaces cut into the side, as if by a long, marble tenon. Metal attachments, which highlight the importance of the dedication as well as the subject, are employed for two portraits,the booted figure with metal tassels (38) and the Late Roman imperial official from the upper cavea (54). 17. S-1984-5,unpublished.

ANALYSIS OF THE FINDS

19

Heads were made separatelyfor insertion into two large statues set up in a courtyardadjacent to the Theater. The head of the Amazon (67) had a flat-bottomed tenon that was set into the corresponding neck cavity.In the Antonine mantle statue (68), the neck cavitywas prepared with a point and a punch, but with no additional cutting at the bottom. The portrait bust of a woman (78) had the head set on either as a repair or to reuse another head; a pour channel for the lead to secure the iron dowel was cut into an unprepared joining surface, onto which the excess lead overflowed. Only one head was possiblyattached separatelyto sculpturesrestored on the facade, between the columns, or in the mythological reliefs on the podia-that of the Nereid (or Aphrodite) (9). The Tiberian portraithead of a Roman (28) was originallyaffixed by a large rectangular dowel to a herm. The arms of the Amazon (67), which are both missing, were attached separately and subsequently pulled off, probablyfor the metal dowels. On the Antonine mantle statue (68), the right arm was also attached by a heavy iron dowel, the left by a marble tenon. The right arm'sjoining surface, roughened with a flat chisel, has partial anathyrosis;the treatment seems to have sufficed because the arm was held down by the side and also secured to the torso by a strut. This joint was not masked by drapery.Thejoining surface for the left arm, in contrast,is more roughly tooled with a punch or a point, as if the arm's raised position called for a heavier adhesive. The left arm was possibly also balanced by the connection of a scepter or spear to the base. A clamp cutting in the right edge of the plinth secured the figure to a base. Treatment of the attachment surfaces varies. The Silenos's drapery edge (11C) was attached solely with an adhesive to a very smooth surface. Since the attached piece rested on an upper and not in danger of falling off under its own weight. surface, thejoin would be "gravity-assisted" The high-relief head of the Nereid (9) was inserted deeply into the block, where the surface was considerably roughened with a heavy point to provide good purchase for an adhesive. The side surface of Augustus(?) (2) was carefullysmoothed and shaped, and minimallyroughened with a light claw and occasional strokesfrom the edge of a flat chisel. On the attachment surface for the large attributeof a young musician (24), marksof a point and a round-endedchisel were smoothed in order to create a tight-fittingjoin. Here, the long, narrow marble wedge itself would have acted as a tenon, and thus the attribute would also have received support from a base. Joining surfaces for the hands on the togatus (34) and Augustus(?) (2), where thejoint would have been secured by a dowel and masked by drapery,are roughened with a point, while the arm of 14A is more finely dressed with the claw for a smootherjoin. A few features are sufficientlyunusual to require comment. Firstis the shoulder possiblyfrom a statue of Herakles (35). The arm insert, which wasattached at the shoulder,washidden canonically by a projection of drapery or skin, but a small pin was also inserted into the projecting surface. Since the small hole does not pierce the projecting piece completely, it may have been for the addition of something to the exterior, like a lion's tail. Also unusual are two spearlike objects which appear to be inserts, perhaps from a victory or honorific monument (52A, 52B). Their resting surfaces show careful tooling with a claw chisel. The lack of dowel cuttings confirms the impression that these pieces were inserted into the upper surface of an object from which there was no particulardanger of falling. An unusual method of attachment provides the high-relief head of Triton (10) with a halo of dolphins framing the face. Two dolphins are carved in relief or attached to the outer surface of the hair;but the one from the lower left of the relief has no hair to support it, so a long strutwas devised in order to bring the dolphin head forward into the same visual plane as the Triton's face, thus ensuring the dolphin's visibilityas a focus point. This is a rather daring approach to architectural sculpture that may have developed from working on architectural elements with parts that project some distance from their support, like the volutes and figural attachments of Corinthian capitals.l8 18. Cf. the late-2nd-century A.C. dolphin capital from Corinth A-89-2 (Williams and Zervos 1990, pp. 348-349, no. 16, pl. 66).

SCULPTURAL DECORATION

20

IN THE CORINTH THEATER

COLOR

Color is used in both the sculptural and architectural decoration of the scaenae frons to highlight the main features of the architectural design and possibly also to enhance the meaning of the sculptures (Plan III). At the time of Shear's excavations, an unusual amount of paint was noticed on statuary found in the Corinth Theater. Red, yellow, and blue pigments have previously been observed on the reliefs assigned to the podia on each level of the facade.19 Although weathering has caused the pigments to fade or disappear, pigment survives in a variety of areas, often in greater concentration on the backs of heads. The preserved colors include deep red (1OR4/6 and 4/8), bright red (1OR5/8), red (2.5YR 5/8), deep brown (7.5YR 5/6), reddish yellow to light brown (7.5YR 5/6, 6/3, 6/4, 6/6, 7/4, and 7/6), brownish yellow (10YR 6/6), and yellow (1OYR 7/8).20 Red pigment has been interpreted in certain areas as sizing for gold leaf, though it may also have served as the undersizing for another color.21 The deepest red appears in the hair, as well as for some outlining of eyes, nostrils, and lips (1OR 4/8). It is used for hair on the head of Helios(?) (6); for the head hair of the Doryphoros (20), and to outline his eyes, nostrils, the inside of his mouth, and for his lips. Deep red (1OR4/ 6) is applied to drapery on the mantle of Augustus(?) (2). 5/8) appears on the Silenos's head hair and beard (1 A, 12A), on the Bright, medium red (10OR sleeve of one's costume (11B), on the red triangles of his boots (11G, 11H), and for the underside of one of their upper eyelids (12A). It also occurs inside the mouth of Hadrian's(?) gorgon (4A); in the hair of the Ares of Ludovisi type (16); in the hair of Dionysos (85); on the boot and boot strap of the male figure wearing calcei (38); and in Aphrodite's hair (15), to outline her eyes, for the inside of her mouth and nostrils, and possibly on her lips (1OR 5/8 to 3/6). A deep to reddish brown (7.5YR 5/6) is employed in Silenos's head hair (11A). Reddish yellow to light brown appears on the Silenos's forehead and cheeks ( 11A, 12A) (7.5YR 6/6 to 6/4); the side of the face of Aphrodite (15) (7.5YR 5/6); on Dionysos's arm (26C) to outline skin, and on the palm (7.5YR 6/3); on the Doryphoros head (20A) over parts of the forehead, brow, eyelids, cheeks, and neck (7.5YR 5/6); on Augustus(?) (2) on the skin just above the mantle (7.5YR 7/4 to 6/4); and in a lighter yellow-brown tone on the legs of the same figure (7.5YR 7/6). Brownish yellow remains on the sleeve of Dionysos (26C) (10YR 6/6). Yellow (10YR 7/8) remains on the Silenos's irises and is used to outline the separation of hair from face (1 A, 12A). A deep reddish yellow (7.5YR 7/8) represents the fringe on the hanging mantle of an over life-size imperial statue (14A). In addition, light brown (7.5YR 7/4 to 6/4) appears to lie on top of the red on the Augustus(?) (2) in areas over his right hip. Dark stains, possibly from paint though no color is identifiable, occur as two vertical stripes on the Aphrodite statuette (64). Shadows of colors can be seen on the Amazon (67) as running spirals on the crossstraps, which may have been yellow, and as possible decorative patterns in the skirt. The largest amount of paint discovered on remains from the Theater survives on sculptures that can be associated with the facade. Few traces of pigment can be detected on sculptures that certainly did not form part of this assemblage. Statuary that was set up individually in the Theater complex was doubtless also painted, but the paint is best preserved where it was partially protected by the architecture. The greatest amount of pigment is preserved on the two male busts that were protected by the projecting pedimental cornices (6, 7), on the silenoi (11, 12), which appear to have stood under the cantilevered roof, and on the Augustus(?) (2), which also stood within an aedicula. The two high-relief heads (9, 10), which were not protected by overhangs, have no paint preserved. Therefore, the most important factor in the preservation of pigment 19. Shear 1928a; Reuterswird 1960, pp. 203, 211; Corinth

IX, ii, nos. G28-1,G47, G51, G53, G90, A10-2,A13-4,A19, H131, U25, U44. 20. On sources of pigments in antiquity, see Forbes 19641972, III, pp. 213-236. For painted marble, see Graeve and

Preusser 1981; Brinkmann 1985, 1987; and Chryssoulakis, Queyrel, and Perdikatsis 1989. 21. On the use of red ground for gilding, see Artal-Isbrand et al. 2002.

ANALYSIS OF THE FINDS

21

does not appear to be the depth of fill deposited after the Theater's destruction, but the protection provided by the architecture while the marbles were in place on the building. The application of color draws attention to the articulation of the architecture.22 The use of blue as background for the pediments, relief heads, and mythological reliefs unifies the facade. Blue is the color of Helios's realm, the sky, and Poseidon's, the sea. The reds and browns of the hair and the yellow or metallic details may have appeared as colorful highlights, perhaps to suggest the glint of the sun. Most stunning would have been the effect of the over life-size imperial portraits in the niches. On the best-preserved figure of the four, Augustus(?) (2), the skin was highly polished to appear like ivory and the garment was painted to resemble gold. These four figures might have appeared as chryselephantine statues, as if the designers intended them to display the magnificentiaof imperial power. The colorful effect of the sculptures would have complemented the use of colored stones in the architecture. In his catalogue of the architectural fragments, Stillwell indicates that different types of stones were incorporated into the scaenae frons.23 The fabric of the largest columns, assigned to the first level, Stillwell identifies as white Pentelic marble (CorinthII, nos. 124, 125), giallo antiquo (126), purple breccia (128b, g, h), granite (128c, d), and Naxian (126bis) and Hymettian (126tris, 127, 128a, e, f, i,j) marble. "Purple breccia" probably refers to the red and white variegated marble that comes from Skyros, many pieces of which exist in the architectural marble pile beside the Theater.24 Cornices with modillions from the porta regia are of white marble (53, 54); the remaining cornices are of bluish white (55, 56-59, 60, 77-78) or white marble (61, 76); and capitals are white (e.g., 107, 108). Architrave-frieze blocks from the doorways on the first story are of Pentelic marble (90-93); from the straight elements, of blue-white marble (94-96). Material assigned to the second story includes columns of dark blue limestone (129, 130, 133, 135a-e) and purple breccia (131, 132, 134, 135f-n). To the third story are assigned columns of the smallest order, of blue-gray (136, 138), grayish white (137), blue-white (140), and dark blue (139) stones, while the smallest architrave-frieze blocks are of Pentelic marble (100-106). Pilaster capitals and shafts are also of several types of stones. Associated with the first-story porta regia are pilaster capitals of white Pentelic marble and shafts of white attached to curves (CorinthII, nos. 146, 147), while those of the hospitalia are of dark blue Hymettian marble (148151). The remaining pilaster shafts attached to flat walls occur in three sizes, the largest of Pentelic (152), the medium-sized of Hymettian marble or purple breccia (153-155), the smallest of Hymettian marble or purple breccia (159, 160). Pilasters are only restored flanking the doorways, and the largest and most important door apparently was highlighted with the whitest marble, Pentelic, while dark Hymettian and purple breccia flanked the doorways on the upper stories. In general, the darkest, most varied, and most colorful stones were used on the lowest level; the palette was somewhat reduced for the second, and it was limited even further in the third. Among the column shafts, the greatest range of colored tones occurs on the first level; on the second, the palette is reduced to two-purple and dark blue; and the third has only dark blues to blue-grays or blue-whites, lacking both the bright whites and the deep purples and yellows. Thus, the architect has placed the darkest and strongest colors across the base, providing solidity and support through visual means to the upper levels. Colors used for the columns decrease in intensity as the architecture decreases in scale, such that in the highest level only varied shades of grays occur. Notably, the highest level would have had the greatest amount of shadow from the projecting roof above, which would have changed with the movement of the sun. The coordina22. For a discussion of the role of color, see Ridgway 1999, pp. 103-142. 23. Corinth II, pp. 101-105, 111-125. Cf. Gnoli 1988, pp. 232-235, fig. 240, for provenance and colored illustration of purple breccia from Skyros. The Great Bath on the Lechaion Road, studied by J. Biers, contained an even greater array of

colored stones; see Corinth XVII, pp. 3-4. For detailed treatment of the elaborate decoration of the Baths of Caracalla in Rome, see DeLaine 1997, pp. 66-84, 101, 225-226. 24. I thank R. Siddall for identifying the red marble from the Corinth Theater as coming from Skyros. On Skyros marble, see Ward-Perkins 1992, Appendix 1, pp. 156-157, pl. II:d.

22

SCULPTURAL DECORATION

IN THE CORINTH THEATER

tion of the diminishing proportions with the changing color values of the columnar architecture corresponds to the diminished size and projection of relief in the top story. The change in color from the bottom to the top of the facade would have helped to emphasize its height and to convey the impression of a very distant and large Hadrian(?) (4). The coordination of the architecture and the sculpture indicates that the designers of the various segments of the structure worked closely together in the initial stages of the project. The designing architect and sculptor would very likely have selected elements with the patron at the beginning, when the "western plan" of theater building was selected. This design decision was probably made so that the Theater would have large niches set off by curved recesses in which to place the imperial family group.25 If this interpretation is correct, the sculpture was the driving force behind the architectural planning, or, put another way, the function of the architecture was to support the sculpture.26 MATERIAL,

TECHNICAL

PROCESSES,

AND "WORKSHOP"

AFFILIATIONS

The marble sources for most of the Roman sculptures from the Theater complex and for all sculptures on the scaenae frons are the Attic quarries on Mt. Pentele. The Corinth Theater sculptures, therefore, exemplify the dominance of the Attic market in mainland Greece in the Roman period, although this picture is significant primarily for the first half of the 2nd century A.C., given the dates of many of the pieces. Other marble sources are evident in lesser quantity. The two-figured group of Antinous and Dionysos (25, 26), for instance, is made of a coarsegrained, gray Thasian marble, and sculptures in the Theater group of Hellenistic date exhibit different marble sources, including Parian and other island marbles.27 It is sometimes assumed that marble workers come with their material from the quarry, which would suggest that many marble carvers working on the Theater project were employed by owners of an Attic quarry. An epigraphicaljoin that I made in 1998 of a segment of marble revetment found over the central stage building in 1902 to a section found in the orchestra in 1926 supAOHNAIOEEHOIEI.Above ports this assumption.28 The inscription now yields the text OEOAOTOS the signature in Greek remain the large characters VI from a dedicatory inscription in Latin, which Meritt restored as dedicavit,but other possibilities include curavit, restituit,instauravit, and ornavit.29As other revetment from the Theater has inscriptions written across adjacent slabs, the same possibility exists here.30 It is not apparent from the inscription to what part of the building decorations or to what period the text refers. The clamp cutting for attachment set into the lower edge of the "Theodotos" revetment, however, is more analogous to cuttings on the group of thicker revetment slabs that probably derive from the Hadrianic period, which were fastened by clamps extending over the front face, than to the small attachment holes in the upper surface of the thin revetment slab from the Theater containing Vespasian's name.31 The Theodotos block is also much thicker than the Flavian slab. Signatures of Athenian sculptors in the Roman period are more commonly found in association with freestanding statuary or relief vases than with buildings. The Belvedere Torso, for 25. On the western Roman theater plan, see Frezouls 1982, pp. 369-407, and Sear 1990. 26. On the relationship between construction and design, see DeLaine 1997, pp. 66-68. 27. Selected white marbles from American School excavations at Corinth and Isthmia have been sampled for isotopic analysis. See Sturgeon in CorinthXX, pp. 357-358, and in Isthmia IV, p. 189. For an overview of the kinds of stones used for sculpture at Corinth, see Sturgeon in CorinthXX, p. 357. The coarsegrained, gray Thasian from the Theater differs from the coarsegrained, white Thasian that was used in other parts of Roman Corinth. 28. 1-251: CorinthVIII, i, p. 54, no. 71. 1-2294: CorinthVIII,

iii, p. 13, no. 41. See P1.2:c. 29. Meritt in CorinthVIII,i, p. 54. On inscriptions commemo-

ratingrebuilding,see Thomas and Witschel 1992, pp. 149-164. On Hadrian's building activities and inscriptions recording his benefactions, see Boatwright1989, pp. 250-267; and 2000, pp. 108-171, 204-209. 30. See CorinthVIII, iii, p. 50, no. 105 (P1.2:a); pp. 42-43, no. 84 (P1.l:d); pp. 152-153, no. 433, to which I havejoined I2774 (P1.2:b); and pp. 94-95, no. 221a, b, which I havejoined to pp. 137-138, no. 346 (P1.2:d). 1-2369from the Theater also has a letter cut across the edge. 31. CorinthVIII,iii, pp. 42-43, no. 84 (P1.l:d).

ANALYSIS OF THE FINDS

23

example, bears the signature of Apollonios, son of Nestor of Athens, on the animal skin on which he sits;at Olympia,signaturesare incised on the statue support and base of statuesof Claudius and Agrippina the Younger; and Glykon signed the Farnese Hercules on the front of the supporting rock. Neo-Attic artists signed their work on marble vases.32From the survivingevidence, it appears rare to have a sculptor's signature on a building dedication, but signatures of Roman architectsare known.Theodotos Athenaios seems unlikelyto be the name of the architect, as the freedman M. ArtoriusM. L. Primus,Architectus,did in the for architects sign as architectus, at The Theater Pompeii. Large inscription recording the achievement of the architect Zeno, son of Theodorus, in the theater atAspendos (A.D. 161-168), uses the term architect. C. and M. Stallius, who were hired from Rome to do the reconstruction of the "Odeion of Perikles"for Ariobarzanes II of Cappadocia in 52 B.C., are also referred to as architects.33Moreover,the formula of name, n used by sculptors since the 6th century B.C.34 ethnic, and 7rotil, is one that had been The occurrence of a sculptor'ssignature on architecturalsculpture is not common, but can be found on the Mausoleum of Halicarnassosand the GreatAltar at Pergamon.35The signature of a sculptor is preservedfrom the theater facade at Side. There the inscription states:]cio; rFX6xcovo; I[ra ay] a&aTcLrTs avcoax7 [vfS].36 Bean finds the use of the word agalmata, rather than qpyado[?Tco] andrias,somewhat unusual, since agalmanormallyrefers to a statue of a god or a statue dedicated in a holy place. The scaenae frons at Side has recently been restored with three stories, rather than the two previously thought, allowing for the support of many sculptures; and it is known that deities were depicted in the upper partsof the theater,for example, the busts of Artemisand Demeter on coffers. If the designation "upper skene," however, refers to the area above the pulpitum rather than to the upper stories, then the inscription may refer to the reliefs with scenes from the life of Dionysos across the base of the scaenae frons. At Patras,the signature of an artiston the acroterion that wasfound in the Roman odeion, where it probablybelongs, takes the form ALov6LT otoL'sL.

At Corinth, the Theodotos inscription appears to be the signature of a sculptor, and this is so far the only sculptor's signature that has come to light from Roman Corinth. The inscription states that he is an Athenian, and its appearance on marble revetment that appears to have formed part of a dedication suggests that he made some sculptures for the Roman theater at Corinth. It is not known whether this was the only signature or one of a series. Theodotos's work cannot be identified and his position-as master sculptor, overall designer, or head of a workshop-cannot be established; an Attic workshop is not necessarily indicated by the inscription. What is known archaeologicallyabout the chronological phases of the Theater and about the other building revetment found in it makes likely the association of this segment of 32. On the Belvedere Torso, Vatican 1192, see Helbig4, I, no. 265; Smith 1991, p. 133, fig. 165. On the statuesfrom Olympia, see Hitzl 1991, pp. 40, 44, 83-85, pls. 14:a, c, 17:b. On the FarneseHercules, see Kleiner 1992, p. 338, fig. 305 (late 2nd to early 3rd centuryA.C.). For signatureson marblevases by neoAttic sculptors, see Pollitt 1986, pp. 172-176. 33. Pompeii:Richardson1988, pp. 75-80; CILX 841. Aspendos, two bilingual dedications over the entrances on both sides of the stage building: BernardiFerrero 1966-1974, IV,pp. 1516, 232-233; CIGIII4342d. Athens:Vitr.5.9.1;IGII23426. Other architectsof theatersin the RomanWestare known, asValerius from Ostia who made the roof for the Theater of Scribonius Liboin Rome (Plin.HN36.102), Casinum,Herculaneum,Leptis Magna, and Caesarea-Iol (Fuchs 1987, pp. 24, 27, 45, 161). Where their original location is known, these inscriptions appear to have been set up over the inner or outer aditus (Casinum,Herculaneum) or on the outer caveawall near the parodos entrance (Pompeii); see Fuchs 1987, p. 45. On artists' signaturesin Roman Greece, see Palagia 2001, pp. 298-299. I have not attemptedto collect all such signatures.On Atticwork-

shops in Roman Greece, see Kokkorou-Aleura2001. 34. On sculptors' signatures, see Marcad6 1957b; Stewart 1979,pp. 157-174, forAtticsculptorsca. 320 B.C.-A.D.14;Viviers 1992;Goodlet 1991;and, for the Roman period, Toynbee 1951; Kron 1977; and Hitzl 1991. Cf. also Kane 1988 on Asklepiades Athenaios, who signs a statue base from Ptolemais in the 2nd centuryA.C. On the superiorityof architectsand their pay over other workmen, see Burford 1969, pp. 141-145, 154; on Roman architects,WilsonJones 2000, pp. 19-30. On the reputation of Roman sculptors,see, e.g., Kleiner 1992, pp. 4-5. 35. Mausoleum:Jeppesen 1992, p. 87, pl. 23:2. Pergamon: AvPVIII,i, pp. 54-60, nos. 70-83. 36. On the inscription, see Bean 1965, pp. 6-7, no. 86, and Mansel 1963, p. 137. On the Side theater, see Mansel 1963, pp. 122-142, figs. 112, 113 (busts, mid-2nd century A.c.); Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 135-143 (last quarterof the 2nd century A.c.); and recent work on the architecture by Izmirligil is reported in AR 1990, p. 121. On building terms used in inscriptions from the theater at Aphrodisias, see Reynolds 1991. Patras:Rizakis1998, no. 273.

24

SCULPTURAL DECORATION

IN THE CORINTH THEATER

revetment with the Hadrianic phase of construction. If Theodotos were the overseeing sculptor for the Hadrianic scaenae frons, he would have hired a large number of craftsmen with various specialties and degrees of experience to complete the unusually large project. The probable disparities in backgrounds and skills of the carvers provide a likely explanation for the varied models, styles, and techniques evident among the sculptures. There is little evidence for sculptural production at Corinth. Recently a few discards have been recognized from the Hellenistic and Roman periods, which can now be added to those discovered near Poseidon's sanctuary on the Isthmos.37 This evidence indicates that in the Hellenistic period, workshop activity was located close to major places of business, that is, at either end of the long South Stoa at Corinth and on the Rachi at Isthmia. Evidence of workshop activity for the Roman period at Corinth comes from areas farther from central business districts, possibly from locations near the places where the sculptures were to be set up.38An unfinished leg found in one of the houses east of the Theater may be a discard from the Theater's Gigantomachy reliefs, and several feet, carved as attachments, were left unfinished in the area of the Gymnasium.39These unfinished pieces indicate local working rather than the ethnic origin or "school" of the carver. The economic aspects of the project are difficult to address for lack of relevant building records at Corinth. Records survive for a few Roman theaters, but these theaters are generally of different sizes, occur in differently constituted cities, and may not have been as fully decorated as Corinth's, and so are not necessarily comparable. Inscriptions indicate that rebuilding of the proscenium and scaenae frons of the Leptis Magna theater in A.D. 157/8 was paid for separately from the rest of the theater. This rebuilding was funded by two separate bequests (of HS 300,000 and 200,000), presumably because of the considerable expense. The Leptis Magna theater, initially dedicated in A.D. 1-2 but extensively restored in the Antonine period, has a stage of 45.7 m in length-somewhat shorter than Corinth's, which is 60.0 m long.40 In addition, as discussed below (pp. 42-45), building inscriptions from theaters in both the eastern and western parts of the empire indicate that these large public structures are frequently funded by private euergetism, and that it is common for separate sections to be built at different times and paid for by different donors, who are in some cases inhabitants of another town.41 In the last 10 years scholars have given increasing attention to the effect of technical processes on the appearance of architectural sculptures. These studies are instructive here, despite the different dates of the material. In her study of the Ara Pacis (13-9 B.C.), Conlin distinguishes between carvers who specialized in heads versus draped torsos, a distinction that is particularly striking among the background figures. In the instances she discusses, it is especially clear that an individual figure was not sculpted by a single carver, a characteristic that contradicts many conceptions about artistic production.42 Closer to the Corinth Theater project, a similar system 37. Isthmia IV, nos. 22, 23, 101, all probably of Hellenistic date; Sturgeon 1998b, p. 5; 2003, pp. 360-362. 38. On workshops at Athens, see Kokkorou-Aleura 2001; Despinis 2003, esp. pp. 113-121. On workshops at Epidauros, see Katakis 2002, pp. 313-319. 39. I thank J. Wiseman for permission to mention sculptures from the University of Texas excavations in the Gymnasium. 40. On building costs, the small theater at Madauros of ca. 900 m2 cost HS 375,000 in the early 3rd century A.c.; that of Calama, with an area of ca. 3,050 m2 had HS 400,000 promised for it, between A.D. 161-209; both are in inland Numidia Proconsularis. Pliny (Ep. 10.39.1) finds the large theater at Nicaea in Bithynia extravagant at HS 10 million, even though it has over twice the area of that at Calama with ca. 6,600 m2, and a stage width of 85.0 m versus 58.0 m for that at Calama (DuncanJones 1982, pp. 75-78, 91). On the Leptis Magna theater, the dedication date of A.D. 1-2 is followed by Caputo (1987), but Sear (1990, p. 380) doubts that the three large hemicycles can

be part of the Augustan theater, since they do not appear elsewhere until the late 1st century, as in Naples and Regina, Spain, and they become more common in the Hadrianic period, as at Scolacium in Southern Italy, Lyon in Gaul, Carthage in North Africa, and Bosra in Syria (Trajanic or Hadrianic) (DuncanJones 1982, pp. 75, 92, no. 63; IRT 534). The Corinth stage is 60.0 m wide in both 1st- and 2nd-century A.c. phases (Corinth II, p. 58). 41. Duncan-Jones 1982, pp. 75-78; 1990, pp. 177-184. For a benefactor funding theaters in towns other than his own, see Opramoas of Rhodiapolis, who paid for theaters at Limyra, Xanthos, and Tlos ca. A.D. 140 (Sturgeon 2004, p. 423). 42. Conlin 1997, esp. pp. 27-44, 57-64, 73-89. See Pfanner 1989 for an important discussion of production and copy methods for statues and portraits. Even studies of Michelangelo as a sculptor have interesting counterparts to antiquity because of their preindustrial date; cf. Wallace 1994, on quarrying, templates, assistants, work organization, and models.

ANALYSIS OF THE FINDS

25

of organization has been suggested for some funerary monuments from Athens in the first half of the 2nd century A.C., such as the stele of the Damaskenos, dated to the Hadrianic period.43 A similar picture has been sketched for certain earlier examples. Rehak's investigations of the sculptures from the Temple of Zeus at Olympia (ca. 470-456 B.C.) have shown specialization of

work. He has found that the hair of the pedimental figures exhibits four degrees of finish, with differentderetes existing even on the same block; this suggests that certain craftsmen specialized in certain types of work, with some carving a preliminary "template" and others subsequently

carving the details.44Roafs study of the reliefs from the palaces at Persepolis (first half of the 5th century B.C.) leads to similar conclusions regarding specific assigned tasks. Unfinished sections suggest that the stone carvers were assigned different carving responsibilities, such as roughing

out the figure, carving the body, carving the heads, and polishing the figures. The workmen

appear to have followed a model created by someone else.45 Since the use of models and specialization of carving in large architectural sculpture projects is evidenced over a broad chronological and geographical range, it may be characteristic of many of these projects because of the types of workshop organization and procedures that prevailed in preindustrial communities. Like the Ara Pacis reliefs, the Damaskenos stele, and certain earlier architectural sculptures, the

architecturalsculptures made for the Corinth scaenae frons were very likely carved by a series of masons who were trained to execute special tasks.A similar process may have determined the unfinished appearance of the portrait of a woman (76). Some comparisons can be drawn between the Theater reliefs and other sculpture from the Theater. For example, the Giant head (CorinthIX, ii, no. G8-1), on which heavy drillwork details

the hair and separates locks beside the face, is similar to the heads of the silenoi (11, 12). The resemblance is so strong that this head might almost be taken to be a third Silenos, except that its

size, which is commensurate with the heads of the Gigantomachyreliefs, is too small. The similarities may result, rather, from its being carved by the same workman, who may be called the Silenos Head Master. The head of Trajan (1A) is also comparable with the Silenos heads, espe-

cially regarding the inner corners of the eyes. Heads that are associated with the columns of the scaenae frons exhibit some differences in technique. The Doryphoros (20), which is probably of Early Roman date, is the least well fin-

ished of the sculptures between the columns, both on skin surfaces, where the flat-chiselwork has been smoothed over without eliminating the bumps that it created, and in the hair. The Monteverde youth (19), probablyof EarlyHadrianic date, has chiseled locks and some drillwork in the hair. The Herakles herm (22) exhibits a distinct rendering of the mouth that does not occur in pieces dated Hadrianic, such as the bust of Demeter(?) (8), the head of Aphrodite (15),

and the Monteverde youth. SELECTION OF MODELS

For the pedimental busts, models were chosen that were appropriate to the subject. Demeter(?) (8), therefore, is presented as a Late Classical type, like its Hellenistic predecessor at Lykosoura.46 Many surviving depictions of Demeter, with their quiet demeanor and classicizing hairstyles and drapery arrangements, appear heavily influenced by cult statues.47 Helios(?) (6), on the other

hand, depends more on later Classicaland Hellenistic types, and he is shown with much motion, in keeping with his traditionalactivity.As the griffin plaques (5), the Nereid (or Aphrodite) (9),

and Triton (10) are more fragmentary, it is difficult to discern which models they follow. The Silenos piers (11, 12), however, possess a head type similar to that used for silenoi in theater 43. Damaskenos stele, American School of Classical Studies at Athens: Dow and Vermeule 1965. 44. Rehak 1998, esp. pp. 202-203. For evidence of specialization in the Archaic period, see Brinkmann 1998. 45. Roaf 1983, 1990.

46. On the Demeter statue from Lykosoura, see LIMC IV, no. 436, s.v. Demeter(Beschi). 880, p. 47. On sculptures of Demeter, see LIMC IV, pp. 844-892, s.v. Demeter(Beschi). A Classical cult statue from Eleusis, however, is not preserved.

26

SCULPTURAL DECORATION

IN THE CORINTH THEATER

masksand to the Silenos holding the young Dionysos from the Theater of Dionysos in Athens, a Hellenistic piece that reproduces a 4th-century B.C. statue. The masks and Silenos statues are thought by some to derive from a portrait of Sokrates.48 The style adopted for the sculptures standing between the columns appears to be predominantly Classicalrather than Hellenistic. Indeed, Classicallybased poses are appropriate to the context, a narrowspace bound by twoverticalcolumns. But the distinction between 5th- and 4thcentury B.C. types that would be recognized by a modern viewer probably held no significance for the ancient observer. Greek styles of various types contributed to the Roman Classical style,

and the style had to be appropriate to the subject. Hence, the Doryphoros (20) may have been chosen because it waswell known and associatedwith athletic activityin the palaestraand gymnasium; the youth of Monteverde type (19) because it was an athletic figure that could form a thematic pair with the Doryphoros; the Herakles herm (22) because of its continued relevance as a symbol of the political as well as the educated man; and Chiron (23) for the reference to the musical contests that took place in the Theater, as well as to the preparatoryinstruction for them and perhaps to education more generally.49Appropriatenessof subjectwasmore important than consistency of style for the Greek artist, as we learn from Cicero and others, especially for the kind of sculpturalgroup that would have been viewed from a distance (unlike a small number of works that could be perused at close range, as in a private home or villa).50 Analysisof the Corinth Theater sculptures yields interesting results. The sculptures illustrate technical methods of fashioning and placement in an architecturalcontext in 2nd-centuryA.C. Corinth. Color is used in both the sculptures and the architecture to enhance the presentation in an integrated approach to the monument. Analysis of the imperial group suggests that the sculptor and the architect worked together from the beginning of the project. An Attic workshop is indicated for the sculptures by the use of Attic marble and by the signature of an Attic artist,designer, or workshop head. Carvingof the sculptureswaslikely done close to the building site. Masons engaged in sculptural production were probably assigned specialized tasks, and many would probablyhave been hired locally. Models and styles appear to have been chosen as appropriate to the subjects of the sculpture. The Corinth Theater sculptures, therefore, provide valuable insight into the working methods for a sculptural group from a known context and should provide useful comparative data for the study of Roman theaters and their decoration throughout the empire. DIONYSOS AND THE THEATER Dionysos and his companions received the greatest attention among the sculptures from the Corinth Theater, to judge from the survivingpieces.51The deity himself is represented in seven figures found in the Theater complex (26, 44, 46, 56, 61, 62, 77), and one of the altars (50) appears to be in his honor as well. The companions of Dionysos consist of the silenoi attached to an upper level of the facade (11, 12) and two satyrs(45,46). Twoadditionaldepictions of Dionysos were found near the Theater (85, 94). The sculptures of Dionysos and his companions range in size from large statuettes of ca. 0.45 m to life-size and over. A Dionysiac accent is given to the facade by the prominent location of the silenoi in the upper story,and this emphasis is enhanced by the sculpture of Dionysos as Kitharoidos (26), which likely stood in the porta regia. The other 48. For iconographic sources for the Helios(?), Nereid, Triton, griffins, and silenoi, see the discussions in the catalogue below. Silenos, Athens, NM 257: Karouzou 1968, p. 98; LIMC III, p. 480, no. 687, s.v.Dionysos(Gasparri);Bieber 1961a, p. 14, fig. 46. 49. On Achilles, see LIMCI, pp. 142-144, nos. 618-631, s.v.Achilleus(Kossatz-Deissmann),and p. 196, no. 908, on the interpretation of the Doryphoros as Achilles. On Hellenistic and Roman grave reliefs and the image of the political man,

see Zanker 1993, p. 220, figs. 4, 5, 27, for hip herms. For contests at Corinth, see Biers and Geagan 1970. 50. Cic. Att. 1.4.3, 1.6.2, 1.8.2, 1.9.2, 1.10.3; Fam.7.23.1-3. Ridgway1984, pp. 17-18; Marvin1988. On sculpture in villas, see Neudecker 1988. 51. On the iconography of Dionysos, see, e.g., Pochmarski 1974 and 1990; LIMCIII, pp. 414-514, s.v. Dionysos(Veneri); and pp. 540-566, s.v.Dionysos/Bacchus (Gasparri).

DIONYSOS AND THE THEATER

27

depictions of Dionysos were found in various locations within the Theater proper and its entrances. 44 appeared over the central stage and 46 in the orchestra to lower cavea area. Two further pieces were excavated from the west parodos (61, 62), and two in or near the east parodos (56, 77). The visitor to the Corinth Theater, therefore, would have been confronted by abundant images of Dionysos throughout the complex. Only Aphrodite, the city goddess of Corinth, approaches Dionysos in the frequency of sculptures from the Theater, there being nine examples. Six of these take the form of statuettes.52 The relief busts of a Nereid (or Aphrodite) and Triton (9, 10), which are featured prominently on the facade, are of subjects that commonly appear as accessory figures to Aphrodite. One statue (15) that stood between the columns of the first story of the facade is likely to depict Aphrodite. From the surviving evidence, then, Dionysos and Aphrodite appear to receive equal emphasis on the facade and in the colonnade. The additional six sculptures that may represent Aphrodite (41, 42, 63, 64, 79, 80), however, occur, with one exception (63), as small statuettes, a format in which Dionysos does not occur in the Theater group. This difference in format may reflect the fact that marble figurines of Aphrodite occur with some frequency at Corinth, but not of Dionysos.53 Indeed, the number of representations of Dionysos that were found in or near the Theater is comparable to the number of Dionysos figures that have been found in the rest of the excavations at Corinth conducted by the American School. Pausanias mentions the Theater at Corinth (2.4.5), but he does not say that the Theater is dedicated to Dionysos. A number of deities other than Dionysos are honored in theaters in Greece, such as Apollo, Asklepios, Eros, Amphiaraos, and Athena.54 Dedications to more than one deity are attested in some theaters. At Delos, for example, inscribed dedications to both Apollo and Dionysos occur.55 At Corinth, the Hellenistic altar of Dionysos (?), the numerous sculptures of Dionysos and satyrs, and the silenoi of substantial size make it reasonable to assume that the primary deity associated with the Theater was Dionysos and that the Theater was a focal point in the city for interest in him. 52. For Aphrodite, see LIMCII, pp. 2-151, s.v. Aphrodite (Delivorrias). 53. FromCorinthin general, certaindepictions of Dionysos, which are found primarilyin public areas, occur as large statuettes or on a scale life-size or over.An exception is the Roman marble statuette of Dionysos (S-1999-11) that was found in a Roman villa in the Panagia area, which is being studied by

L. Stirling. 54. On deities associatedwith theaters, see Schwingenstein 1977, pp. 49-62. 55. See Schwingenstein 1977, pp. 35, 50, 56; to Apollo, ID 1873; to Dionysos, ID 1812; and to Dionysos and the Muses, IGXII 28 2.

2

SCULPTURAL ASSEMBLAGES IN THEATERS IN CORINTH AND THE ROMAN EAST

L

ittle survives from the Corinth Theater that can be associated even tentatively with its

decoration in the 5th or 4th century B.C.By analogy with other Greek theaters, it might be supposed that statuary would have been set up here at least by the 4th century B.C., and that, as at Athens and elsewhere, painted stage sets, possibly with perspectival renderings, would have been in use. Schwingenstein has gathered evidence for the decoration of the Greek theater, providing a detailed supplement to studies by Bieber and Pickard-Cambridge.' Schwingenstein has established four categories of sculptural decoration that would have appeared in the Greek theater in varying amounts and with differing frequency: 1. Deities related to the theater. Dionysos leads this category, appearing with or without accompanying satyrs, maenads, thiasos, or theater masks. Apollo and Amphiaraos are found in theaters dedicated to them, and figures that may have theatral functions, such as Nike, Nemesis, and Tyche, may also appear. In addition, Zeus, Hermes, and Herakles are represented in some theaters of the Greek period, but muses seem rare, in contrast to their popularity in theaters and odeia in Roman times.2 2. Honorary monuments for individuals related to the theater: winners of contests; poets, musicians, actors, and athletes; or donors and architects. 3. Honorific monuments related to the state: mythical heroes, historical figures such as statesmen, important citizens, and philosophers. 4. Hellenistic rulers. The Roman period witnesses a surge in theater construction throughout the Roman world, and these theaters preserve a variety of decorative ornament. In Italy and the West, as M. Fuchs has demonstrated, theater decoration includes architectural support figures, reliefs on the pulpitum front or on podia of the scaenae frons, stucco, painting, and mosaics. Other forms are quite varied, comprising herms, masks, appliques, oscilla, and peltae, as well as marble lamps, fountain figures, altars, and candelabra. Statues and statuettes take their places in the midst of this already elaborate environment, primarily as imperial and private portraits, togate and hip-mantle statues, and operanobilia, as well as "ideal sculptures." The last category includes the Olympian gods, other mythological beings, and personifications, among which the most popular, in order of frequency, are Venus/Aphrodite, Dionysos, Diana/Artemis, Apollo, Herakles, Hermes, and Athena.3 Some of these figures are referred to at Corinth by both their Greek and Roman names; for others, the Greek name appears to have been preferred locally. In contrast to the Greek theater, decorative sculptures in the Roman theater have multiplied and occur in various formats, but the emphasis

has shifted

from poets,

playwrights,

and mythological

personae

to

portraits, politicians, and propaganda.4 Sculptures in the round and in high relief function as part of the total Roman decorated facade. The columns have lost their architectural, supportive 1. Schwingenstein 1977; Bieber 1961a; Pickard-Cambridge 1946; Hanfmann 1979. 2. On the worship of deities in theaters, see Schwingenstein 1977, pp. 25-57. On muses in theaters and odeia, see Ridgway

1990a, pp. 254-255; Schneider 1999, pp. 201-220. 3. Fuchs 1987, p. 186. 4. This point has been emphasized in Price 1984, pp. 109, 135, 211; see also Gebhard 1988 and 1996.

30

SCULPTURAL ASSEMBLAGES IN THEATERS

function; and the sculptures, much of their impact as individual works of art, since each forms a single, small element within a large, decorated screen.5 This is not to ignore the possibility that in Classical Greece a single sculpture may have had its impact lessened because it was one of several hundreds or thousands of statues set up in the same location. The large quantity of sculptures displayed in ancient sanctuaries is attested to by various literary sources and statue bases. The tradition of Roman theater decoration in Italy is best described in relation to two early theaters in Rome, those of Scaurus and Marcellus. As described by Pliny (e.g., HN34.36), these two theaters seem to have been designed to impress with the sheer number of statues on display, and the sources are illuminating about the statuary types and functions.6 Studies by Coarelli, M. Fuchs, Gleason, and Kuttner focus on the decoration of the Theater of Pompey and its related porticoes.7 With the paintings and statuary listed by Pliny and works in the list of Tatianus, a 2nd-century A.C. Christian apologist from Syria, Coarelli has associated statues of three draped women that may represent allegorical figures, such as Nations or Provinces, from the porticoes attached to the Theater of Pompey. Each is large in scale, reaching originally about three meters in height, and appears designed to occupy an architectural niche. Coarelli associates the statue known as Pompey in the Palazzo Spada, minus its restored head, with Pompey's theater complex, and identifies it as the portrait of Pompey that was moved to the theater by Augustus. Fuchs associates four colossal statues, which possibly represent muses, with the Theater of Pompey. Gleason focuses attention on the importance of the garden in a portico of the same theater, and Kuttner discusses its sculptures and literary references. Relief decoration in Italian theaters is increasingly a subject of study. M. Fuchs has published an archaistic relief of Herakles that is associated with the Theater of Marcellus in Rome, and fragments of a Gigantomachy frieze of Late Flavian date are connected with the Theater of Balbus.8 The Lanuvium theater has relief griffins decorating the end of a row of seats, and the odeia at Pompeii and Sarnus have winged lion legs on the end of the balteus.9In addition, the stone reliefs long known from the Roman theater in Fiesole have been published by Fuchs, and a few frieze fragments from the theaters at Parma and Verona are on display in the local museums.10 Carved reliefs once decorated entrances to the theater in the villa of Domitian at Castel Gandolfo, and reliefs also marked entrances to the Colosseum in Rome and the amphitheater at Capua.11 In addition, theater decoration in Spain, Portugal, and France has been presented at conferences.12 Sculptural decoration of Corinth's Hadrianic theater draws from the heterogeneous tradition of Greek and Roman architectural sculpture. Some forms of decoration had a lengthy use in theater architecture, such as figural supports and figures standing between columns, while oth5. On the meaning of the sculptures,see, e.g., Zanker1979; Ridgway1984; and Marvin1988. 6. There are too many literaryreferences and statue bases to enumerate them here. 7. Coarelli 1971-1972 and Fuchs 1982; for the porticoes, see Gleason 1994 and Kuttner 1999. 8. Fuchs 1987, p. 13, no. AII a 1, pl. 2:4 (Marcellus);pp. 1112, nos. A II a 1-6 (Balbus);Fuchs 1984 (Balbus). 9. Fuchs 1987, p. 33, pl. 8:1-5 (Lanuvium); p. 47, pl. 9:2 (Pompeii); p. 48 (Sarnus); cf. also p. 73 (Otriculum); p. 89 (Falerii, winged lion feet from ends of a seat row); p. 91, pl. 34:1 (Ferentium, garlands); p. 99 (Volaterrae, flowers and birds); p. 109, pl. 45:5, 6 (Tergeste, floral, bird); and p. 119 (Vicetia). 10. Fiesole:Fuchs 1986;1987, pp. 84-87. Parma:Fuchs 1987, pp. 102-103, pl. 43:1, archaisticbearded figure. Verona:Fuchs 1987,p. 115,pls. 55:4-6, 56:1-4,57:8, partsof twolargearchaistic female figures, small convivialgroup. 11. CastelGandolfo:Hesberg 1978-1980, pp. 316, 319, figs. 15, 16; Fuchs 1987, p. 145. Colosseum: Pesce 1941, p. 46, pl. 38:f. Capua,boar-huntrelief: Koch 1975b, p. 536, fig. 10;LIMC

VI, p. 427, no. 126, s.v. Meleagros (Woodford), mid-Antonine; LIMC II, p. 408, no. 313a, s.v. Apollon/Apollo (Simon); p. 816, no. 111, s.v. Artemis/Diana (Simon), Hadrianic. Pesce 1941, p. 47, shows a reconstruction drawing of the boar-hunt relief over the entrance, with animal predators forming the wall crowns. Other reliefs from entrances of the vomitoria facing the cavea include a processional scene, crowned divinities, a sacrificial scene, a sacred precinct, a statue of Mars, a building under construction, the slaying of Marsyas, Diana at her bath(?), Acteon, Hercules with Antaeus, Augeian stables, and in other scenes, Omphale, dancing maenads, and possible athletes and actors. In addition, on the first level of the exterior facade the keystones of arches are decorated with busts of Diana, Juno or Demeter, Volturnus, Apollo, Mercury, Jupiter, Minerva, Pan, satyrs, masks, and others; all are illustrated in Pesce 1941, pp. 41-43, and dated Late Hadrianic. 12. Spain: e.g., Koppel 1982 on sculptures from the theater at Tarragona. Lisbon: Hauschild 1990, pp. 382-383, fig. 13, pl. 36:b, on a fragmentary relief of Melpomene of Neronian date, probably from a niche on front of proskenion. France: Janon, Janon, and Kilmer 1992 on Orange reliefs.

THE IMPERIAL GROUP

31

ers entered the picture in the Hellenistic or Roman period, such as single busts in pediments, high-relief heads on the architecture, and reliefs on podia. The most distinctly Roman feature is the presentation of the emperor: the largest figure on the facade, in the second-story aedicula over the porta regia, framed by three other imperial figures to form an imperial family group. The ensemble as a whole is Roman, but it employs elements that had developed gradually over time. The particular choices made by the designer of the decorative program for the Corinth Theater seem intended to contextualize Corinth within both Greek and Roman artistic traditions. Indeed, the presentation of battle and heroic scenes as isolated duels in the reliefs on the column podia rather than as continuous frieze bands and the dominance of Herakles in the upper story give a mainland Greek flavor to the whole ensemble.13 THE IMPERIAL GROUP Four imperial figures are reconstructed in the four niches of the aediculae on the scaenae frons. A dramatic presentation of these figures is effected through application of a particular architectural plan. Like the choice of Latin for the dedicatory inscriptions (see pp. 13, 45-49), the architectural plan follows western Roman practice rather than what was typical of many theaters in Greece and Asia Minor. Early Imperial theaters in the West frequently have one large curved niche with two rectangular side openings, like the well-preserved example at Orange in Roman Gaul. The format at Orange contrasts with many Roman theaters in the East, which, like the Antonine theater at Aspendos, exhibit a straight facade.14 The "western plan" with three curved niches first appears in the late 1st century A.C., as in Naples, and enjoys considerable use in the Hadrianic and later periods. Characteristic features are the three large curved niches, which give architectural emphasis to the thre doorways: the large porta regia and the two smaller hospitalia. It is only with the introduction of three large hemicycles that three aediculae are created, emphatically set off from the straight parts of the facade. The model of the large Hadrianic theater at Lyon gives a good idea of the tridimensionality of a scaenae frons with three large openings.'5 The Corinth scaenae frons would have been a very three-dimensional structure, as demonstrated by the computer-generated reconstructions that have been produced byJ. Herbst using the AutoCAD program (Plans II:b-c, IV). In his perspective reconstruction, the architecture appears to have been articulated so as to emphasize the three aediculae. The biggest niche, located on the central axis, would have held the largest and most important figure. This was most likely the colossal seated portrait of Trajan (1), which would have been accompanied by Augustus(?) (2) at right, and Livia(?) (3) at left, with the cuirassed figure of Hadrian(?) (4) in the single niche in the third story directly over Trajan, as discussed above, pp. 9-11. Since these are the most important figures on the facade and their settings are highlighted by the grandiose contexts provided by the aediculae, the architecture seems designed to support the sculpture. Moreover, the change in format from one central hemicycle to three likewise effects a change from a single niche figure that is set higher on the facade, as at Orange, to four, as indicated here. Hence, the western plan can support an imperial family group that includes Trajan, Augustus(?), the founder of the empire, and Livia(?), who figuratively support and legitimize Hadrian's regime. 13. For the reliefs on the podia of the scaenae frons, see CorinthIX, ii. 14. Orange (Arausio): Bieber 1961a, pp. 200-201, figs. 675679; Esp6randieu XII, pp. 28-29, no. 7979, figure in niche. Aspendos: Bieber 1961a, pp. 208-209, figs. 700-706. 15. On the theater plan with three niches, see Sear 1990, pp. 376-382, esp. p. 380 for a summary of various theater plans in the 1st century A.c. and for a list, by region and with dates, of

theaters with three curved niches. The Naples theater is unpublished;other examples of three curvedniches from the first half of the 2nd centuryA.C. include Scolacium/Borgia (Hadrianic); Lyon (Hadrianic);Carthage(Hadrianic);Bosra (Trajanic or Hadrianic);and Corinth.Lyon (Lugdunum):Bieber 1961a, pp. 200-201, figs. 673-674. See also the theater at Augusta Emerita,builtbyAgrippa,restoredunder Trajan:Buruaga1982, pp. 307-309, figs. 3, 6; MacDonald 1986, fig. 124.

32

SCULPTURAL ASSEMBLAGES IN THEATERS

Earlier imperial groups from the Julio-Claudianperiod have been found or are indicated by inscriptions in at least 12 theaters.16The original disposition of all these sculptures is not known, but the emperor in some instances stood alone in the central niche, as at Volterra, Orange, and Dougga, while other family members occasionally stood between the columns, as at Buthrotum and Thera. Further imperial family groups were set up in adjacent courtyards, as at Augusta Emerita (Merida) in Spain, where seven statues were found in a small room attached to the peristyle of the theater, which resembles an imperial shrine.17 But it is only with the development

of the plan with three large niches in the late 1st to early 2nd century A.C.that all members of an imperial familygroup were positioned in the niches of a scaenae frons, and Corinth provides the first good example of this format. Fewer examples of imperial family groups are known from the Flavian to Trajanic period, though there are some indications of the continuation of the tradition, as Urbs Salvia, Nerva, and Falerio illustrate. The 2nd century A.C. provides more examples, partly due to the erection of more theaters, with imperial groups of Hadrianic date known atVasio in Gaul, and of Antonine

date at Tarracoand Saguntum in Spain, and at Rusicade, Thamugadi, Thugga, Carthage (the theater and possibly the odeion), Bulla Regia, Leptis Magna, and Madaurosin North Africa.18 The statue of Hadrian that survivesfrom the odeion at Troyis presumed to have been set up over the central door, while one from the theater at Stobi stood in a niche beside the central door; it is unclear whether or not either was originally accompanied by other imperial figures.19The paucity of records from early excavations has probably reduced the number of theaters in Asia Minor from which imperial statues are known; the more recent excavations of the theater com-

plexes at Aphrodisias and Hierapolis have each produced a number of imperial portraits.Bejor has argued that the Hadrianfrom Hierapolis wasprobablyused in the theater,but possiblyin the cavea rather than on the Severan scaenae frons, which already has an abundance of sculpture.20

contained an imperial family group beAt Nysa on the Maeander,the Gerontikon (bouleuterion) tween the columns of the theaterlike facade.21 The imperial figures on the Corinth Theater

facade are the best-preservedexamples from a Roman theater in Greece.

An inscription (A.D. 14-19) from Gytheion near Sparta, describing the eight-day festival of the Kaisareia, provides evidence for ritual and procession into the theater complex that includes the

depiction of an imperialfamilygroup. Before the performancesbegin, painted images of Augustus as Savior,Tiberius as paterpatriae,and Liviaas Tyche of the city are carried into the theater and set up with Augustus in the center, flanked by Tiberius and Livia. In front of them is a table for burning incense for their health. The images are carried through Gytheion in a procession that begins at the Temple of Asklepios and Hygieia, stops at that of Caesarfor a sacrifice, and ends in 16. Rose 1997a, nos. 5 (Caere), 6 (Casinum), 13 (Gabii), 19 (Luna), 51 (Volterra), 58 (Vaison-la-romaine), 60 (Augusta Emerita), 63 (Tarraco), 66 (Buthrotum), 74 (Gytheion), 81 (Sparta), 97 (Thera), 104 (Aphrodisias[?]). Fuchs (1987, pp. xiii-xiv, 166-180) suggests the central niche of the Roman theater is reserved for the emperor. 17. On the Volterra statues of Augustus (Augustan) and Tiberius and Livia (Tiberian), found before the scaenae frons, see Fuchs 1987, pp. 100-101, 166. Rose (1997a, p. 126, no. 51, pl. 154) argues that the different sizes of the Augustus and the Tiberius and Livia reflect locations on two different levels of the scaenae frons. On the theater's plan, with large central niche and small side doors, see Fiumi 1976, pp. 16-20, fig. 3. Orange (Arausio): Bieber 1961a, p. 201, figs. 675-677; Esp6randieu XII, pp. 28-29, no. 7979, niche figure (Antonine). Dougga: Carton 1902, pl. 10:1, 2; Pfeiffer 1931, p. 154, frontispiece, pl. 15:3, colossal seated figure found under central second-story niche, identified as Lucius Verus; Bejor 1979, p. 44. Buthrotum: Rose 1997a, no. 66, Augustus, Marcus Agrippa, Livia (Augustan). Thera: Rose 1997a, no. 97, Agrippina the Elder, Germanicus, Caligula (Caligulan). Augusta Emerita:

Rose 1997a, no. 60, Augustus and Tiberius (Augustan), Tiberius Gemelus and three headless togate statues (Caligulan). See Fuchs 1987, pp. 166-180, on epigraphical and sculptural evidence for imperial statues in theaters. 18. For bibliography, see Fuchs 1987, pp. 175-180. 19. Troy: Rose 1994, pp. 88-93, note 73, figs. 18-21. Stobi: Gebhard 1981, p. 14, probably in the eastern niche (one of two niches flanking central door); Sokolovska 1981, pp. 97-98, figs. 2, 3. On the imperial cult in theaters, see Fuchs 1987, p. 180; Blanck (1971, esp. p. 90) doubts that permanent statues set up in theaters with other sculptures indicate the imperial cult. 20. Aphrodisias: Inan and Alfoldi-Rosenbaum 1979, nos. 6 (Livia), 24 (Agrippina the Elder[?]), 30 (Claudius), 38 (togate statue of Domitian), 49 (Sabina[?]), 80 (young Augustus of the Constantinian family). Hierapolis: Inan and Alfoldi-Rosenbaum 1979, no. 44, Hadrian; Hierapolis III, no. 15; Gualandi 1977; in addition, Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, no. 7, an Augustus from Side, built into a late wall against the facade of the theater, that may have stood in the theater. 21. Fittschen 1999, p. 108, pl. 207, plan showing location of statues.

ARCHITECTURAL

HEADS AND BUSTS

33

the theater. The images of the imperial family appear to have been set up in the theater, where they could view ritual as well as dramatic performances held in their honor. The marble images of the imperial family that are displayed in many theaters of the empire, including Corinth, were not portable, but like the painted images at Gytheion, they looked down on the religious and dramatic activities that took place in the theater before them.22 It is possible that the Corinth Theater had an imperial family group in the Early Roman architectural phase that was reworked into the Hadrianic arrangement. If the togate statue (34), which was found in the east parodos and carefully repaired in a later period, did represent Tiberius, it may have stood with the sculptures of Augustus() (2) and Livia(?) (3), which appear to be reused in the Hadrianic display. These three figures correspond in dimensions, marble, and especially in the rendering of drapery, which contains many soft folds between the primary folds. The togatus and Livia also show a similar arrangement of material across the foot (for discussion of the reuse of these figures, see their catalogue entries below). The imperial family group that is restored in the aediculae on the Hadrianic scaenae frons of the Theater could therefore be a stage of development in the depiction of the imperial family group that began in the Early Roman period at Corinth. Here, however, the group is displayed on the upper levels of the architecture. The planning of the sculptural group seems coincident with the planning of the architecture, both of which appear designed to convey imperial imagery. Further, the painted garment and high polish of the Augustus would suggest that it was meant to resemble chryselephantine sculpture, which, together with the Jupiter-like drapery arrangement, would convey his divinity. This may have been the case with the Livia and Trajan as well. The possible emphasis on the family of the first emperor as well as on Trajan would appear to coincide with Hadrian's new emphasis on Augustus, indicated in his coinage of A.D. 123.23 ARCHITECTURAL

HEADS AND BUSTS

Relief heads and busts, such as 6-10, are employed in related architectural contexts in the Roman period, so they will be addressed together here. The tradition of placing heads, for example, of Medusa, in pediments goes back to the Archaic period, as is well known from the east pediment of Temple C at Selinus.24 Medusa, given the story of her beheading by Perseus, is a figure whose image is appropriately truncated to a head and whose apotropaic function is logically performed from the upper parts of temples. Although the practice wanes in the Classical period, the renewed interest in placing heads in pediments that occurs in Hellenistic monuments probably provided the inspiration for Roman artists.25A terracotta model in Naples of one such monument, dated ca. 300 B.C., shows a bust in the pediment of a stage building.26 The bust is not used in large-scale architectural decoration until much later, major examples being the tondi-busts on the Late Hellenistic monument of Mithridates on Delos (102-101 B.C.) and in the "Heroon" at Kalydon.27 The late appearance of the bust as architectural sculpture follows its rather sporadic use for funerary and votive monuments, which appear on a large scale in stone primarily in Cyrenaica and in terracotta in South Italy and Sicily.28 22. SEGXI922-923. See Price 1984, pp. 60-61, 72, 109, 111, 188, and 210-211, where the beginning of the procession at the Temple of Asklepios and Hygieia is linked to the purpose of the festival: the preservation of the emperor; see also Rose 1997a, pp. 142-144. 23. On the change in Hadrian's titulature on imperial coinage and the interpretation that Hadrian wanted to be seen as a new Augustus, see Birley 1997, p. 147, and the discussion below, p. 46. 24. Dinsmoor 1950, pp. 81-82; Lawrence 1996, p. 84, fig. 116. 25. On the use of the gorgon generally, see LIMC IV, s.v. Gorgo/Gorgones(Krauskopf), s.v. GorgonesRomanae (Paoletti);

Hommel 1954, pp. 65-67;Jucker 1961, esp. pp. 145-150; and Floren 1977. 26. From the Santangelo Collection: Bethe 1900, pp. 5969; Levi 1926,pp. 173-175, no. 773, fig. 134;Pickard-Cambridge 1946, pp. 220-221, fig. 82; Bieber 1961a, p. 130, fig. 480, and p. 293, note 10; Boethius and Ward-Perkins1970, p. 167, pl. 97. 27. Delos: Delos16, pp. 29-42; Lawrence 1996, p. 164, fig. 267. Kalydon:Dyggve,Poulsen, and Rhomaios 1934;Dinsmoor 1950, p. 329, dated ca. 100 B.C. 28. On the bust form, see Beschi 1969-1970; Bell 1981;BarrSharrar1987, on the bust in the minor arts;and Winkes 1969, on the form in Roman portraits.

34

SCULPTURAL ASSEMBLAGES IN THEATERS

Both heads and busts flourish as forms of architectural sculpture in Roman times, when they are found in varied locations, including pediments, friezes, capitals, coffers, and akroteria. An example in the Greek East is seen in the Library of Celsus at Ephesos, finished ca. A.D. 135, where one head occupies each of the three pediments on the facade.29 The Temple of Hadrian at Kyzikos, known through drawings of Cyriacus of Ancona, may have employed a bust of Hadrian in the pediments.30 The outer Propylaea at Eleusis with the bust of Antoninus Pius in its pediment suggests eastern influence, reflecting the tradition of the architectural tondi-busts from the agoras in Smyrna and Aphrodisias.31 Tondi figures are not confined to portraits, however, as the bust of Apollo in Hamburg illustrates;32and a bust of Helios occupies the pediment of the 3rd-century A.C.Serapeion at Miletos.33 Relief busts also are depicted in pediments on the elaborate sarcophagus from Velletri and represented on the grave monument of the Haterii.34 The tradition of applying sculpted heads or busts to the architecture is strong in Asia Minor. At Pergamon, a frieze of comic masks and garlands is associated with an entrance to the Roman theater in the upper city.35 On the Trajaneum at Pergamon, perhaps completed under Hadrian, Medusa heads are set between consoles in the frieze.36In the colossal Temple of Apollo at Didyma, begun in the late 4th century B.C. but completed by Caligula, heads of Medusa are set between rinceaux of acanthus in the frieze, and busts identified as Apollo and Zeus assume the position of volutes on the corner capitals.37The Apollo and Zeus, which Pulz dates to the Hadrianic period, provide good parallels for the heads of the Corinth silenoi (11, 12). In the Temple of Zeus at Aizanoi, a large female bust, also of Hadrianic date, projects from the middle akroterion.38 At Aphrodisias, large heads of Medusa, Herakles, Perseus, and the Minotaur were situated on consoles in the Hadrianic Baths.39 The emphasis on heads or busts as architectural decoration also occurs in Pamphylia at Side in the Medusa frieze from the smaller peristyle temple, which, as Strong and Ward-Perkins have noted, resembles the frieze of the Trajaneum at Pergamon.40 The theater at Side has busts of deities and muses on its coffers, as well as masks projecting from the architrave frieze course between consoles.41 In fact, human relief-heads and busts were particularly favored in Asia Minor theaters, where they often occur as coffer decoration, as Tancke's study illustrates with examples from the theaters at Aspendos, Side, Myra, Sagalassos, and Perge.42 29. Ephesos: Boethius and Ward-Perkins1970, p. 397, pl. 211, model and date; Wilberg in EphesosV, i, pp. 28-30, pl. I; Oberleitner 1978, no. 158, fig. 93. 30. On Kyzikos,see Ashmole 1956 and 1959, p. 36. See also, on the pediment with bust identified as Helios from Sagalassos, Lanckoronski1890-1892, II, p. 141, fig. 111, and Mitchell and Waelkens 1988, p. 60. 31. Eleusis:Jucker1961, St 38, pl. 35. See Hommel 1954, p. 110, note 460, for a list of imaginesclipeataeused as pedimental decoration. Smyrna:Naumann and Kantar 1950, esp. pl. 38 (bustof YoungerFaustinaon archof the westhall of the Agora). Aphrodisias:Smith 1990a. 32. Vermeule 1965; 1968, pp. 88, 90-91, fig. 32 (Antonine). Other busts of various materials and uses include divinities (Dioskouros, Herakles, Zeus), theater masks,and personifications (Africa).Cf. the relief busts from Aquileia:Scrinari1972, nos. 606-613. 33. Knackfussin MiletI, vii, pp. 180-210, figs. 215, 217. 34. Velletri:the busts depict Caelus, Selene, Apollo Helios, tritons (or winds), Caelestis(?),and Medusa;see Lawrence1965, p. 219. Haterii,in Rome, LateranCollection:the bustsare probablyportraitsof the deceased; see Kraus1967, no. 200; Helbig4, I, no. 1075, late 1st century A.C. 35. On the frieze, see Winterin AvPVII,ii, pp. 1-5, no. 404; see also AvP IV, pp. 1, 16; and AvPVIII, i, no. 236, bearing a dedicatory inscription to Dionysos, found at the north end of the orchestra between the scaenae frons and the auditorium, now in Istanbul.

36. Stiller in AvPV, ii, pp. 20-25, pi. 12; Strong 1953, pp. 131-134, fig. 4, pl. 35; Boethius and Ward-Perkins1970, pp. 392-393. On the recent reconstruction of the Trajaneum,see Mellink 1990, p. 129, fig. 29. The stiff hair of these figures corresponds to the lines of the consoles. 37. Dinsmoor (1950, pp. 229-233, pl. 55) argues the Medusa heads were located over the intercolumniations;Mercklin (1962, no. 337a, b, figs. 619-622, 625) provides no date; and Pilz (1989, pp. 47-52, 136-137, 144-145) dates the Medusa heads and capital heads to the Hadrianicperiod. 38. Aizanoi:Akurgal1978, pp. 268-269, pl. 12. 39. Aphrodisias, now in Istanbul: Mendel 1912-1914, II, nos. 497-501 (also included is Perseus); Ward-Perkins1948, p. 74. 40. Side: Strong 1953, p. 133, fig. 5; Boethius and WardPerkins 1970, pp. 393, 407-408; Mansel 1963, pp. 80-81, fig. 61. 41. See Tancke 1989 on coffer decoration. For the coffers from the Side theater, see Mansel 1963, p. 134, figs. 110, 112, 113 (Artemis,Demeter); Tancke 1989, no. 47, pls. 76-80; and Hesberg 1983,p. 228, note 96. Cf.alsobustsof Helios and Selene on a round object from Levadia,now in Chaironeia (Touloupa and Symeonoglou 1967, p. 242, pl. 287:b, g); and busts on shields (Vermeule 1965). 42. Tancke 1989, nos. 46-50, pls. 74-83. On coffer decoration in Greek architecture,see Tancke 1989, pp. 4-52, map in fig. 1.

ARCHITECTURAL

SUPPORT FIGURES

35

Other human heads in entablatures can also be studied in relation to the architecturalsculptures of the Corinth Theater. At Leptis Magna in Tripolitania, the West Gate Arch displays a gorgon medallion, and medallions with heads of gorgons, Nereids, or possibly Atargatis and Skyllaembellish the arcades of the Severan Forum.43Heads decorate capitals from the theaters at Sabrathaand Balagrae.44In Rome, Medusa masks occur on the soffit of the architraveof the Forum of Nerva, and the peopled scroll frieze from Aurelian'sTemple of the Sun contains male maskswith foliate hair and beards.45 The shoulder busts and relief heads from the Theater at Corinth therefore seem very much at home in the context of Roman architecturaldecoration, especiallyin the Greek East.At Corinth, companions of the shoulder busts include a portraitbust in a medallion from a small pediment and busts of Helios and Luna on the coffers of the Captives'Facade.46In addition, profile heads of deities occur in relief between lion-head water spouts on the terracottasima associated with the Roman fountain in the South Stoa. Relief heads depicting Helios, of different styles, are associated with the Odeion, where they were used as coffers or as decoration of the podia below the colonnade.47 In summary,the use of human heads and busts as architectural sculpture occurs on Roman buildings as diverse as temples, libraries, propylaia, and gymnasia, as well as baths, arches, stoas,

and theaters. The subject matter, which is equally varied, in some cases seems related to the purpose or symbolic intent of the building. The traditional association of Medusa with temples remains strong (as at Didyma, Pergamon, Aizanoi[?], and Side), but the deity of the temple may also be depicted, as at Kyzikosand Didyma. Medusa is also represented in the entablatures of baths (Aphrodisias) and forum porticoes (Leptis Magna). Theater masks provide appropriate decoration for theaters, as at Pergamon and Side, but they also appear in porticoes, as at Aphrodisias; statues of Dionysos are common, but not all theaters have them; and fauns and satyrsare at home in gymnasia,like that at Sardis,as well as in theaters.48In the mid-2nd-century A.C. theater at Side, various divine figures are represented as shoulder busts on the coffers: Artemis,

Demeter, Athena, Apollo, Kore, stars (for the Dioskouroi), half-moons (for Luna), and some of the Muses.49In many cases, therefore, the choice of subject does not appear determined by appropriatenessto the architecture, a feature that should be kept in mind when considering the identification of the shoulder busts and relief heads from the Corinth Theater. ARCHITECTURAL SUPPORT FIGURES The use of silenoi as support figures in architecture, as exemplified by the Corinth silenoi (11,

12), follows a tradition of human "columns"established early in the history of Greek architec-

tural sculpture.50 Architectural support sculptures in theaters are especially prevalent in the West,

where they frequently appear in the form of Dionysiac figures. At Syracuse, a maenad and a satyr/telamon with both arms raised acted as supports, probably in the EarlyHellenistic scene 43. On the Aphrodisias school of sculpture, see Squarciapino 1943; on the WestGate Arch, Ward-Perkins1948, pp. 7274, pl. 9:3, and Strong 1988, pp. 120-121, pl. 157; on the Forum, Ward-Perkins1948, p. 74, pl. 9:4, and Bianchi Bandinelli et al. 1966, pp. 91-98, figs. 115-120, dated A.D. 210-216. 44. Sabratha:Mingazzini 1966, pp. 87-88, pl. 39, Severan. Balagrae:Mingazzini 1966, p. 88, note 4; Sichtermann 1959, cols. 325-335, esp. col. 330, fig. 92. 45. ForumofNerva: Toynbee and Ward-Perkins1950, p. 12, pl. 12; Blanckenhagen 1940, pp. 39, 40, pl. xiii. Temple of the Sun: Toynbee and Ward-Perkins1950, p. 22, pl. 11:3. 46. Medallion:S-890,Corinth IX, no. 173, building unknown. Partsof other medallion frames are preserved,but their original contexts are unknown (cf. S-74-33:CorinthIX, nos. 174176). Facade: CorinthIX, no. 226 (S-195); CorinthI, ii, pp. 71-

72, nos. 18, 19. Preservedare four of the estimated 36 original coffers; two of these contained rosettes, but there may have been additional figured panels, as in the coffers at Miletos. 47. Roman fountain: Broneer (1942, pp. 154-156, fig. 11) views the depiction of deities on simas as more Italian than Greek. Odeion: CorinthX,pp. 113-115, nos. 95-105, figs. 106110. To these can be added two pieces: Williams and Zervos 1987, pp. 29, 30, nos. 20, 21, pl. 7. On coffers from Aphrodisias with busts of Helios, Selene, and Silenos, see Mellink 1980, esp. p. 511. 48. Cain 1988. 49. Mansel 1963, p. 134, figs. 110, 112, 113. 50. Schaller-Harl1973; Schmidt-Colinet 1977; Castiglione 1975, figs. 206-224; Schmidt 1982.

36

SCULPTURAL ASSEMBLAGES IN THEATERS

building, although it has also been suggested that the satyr/telamon was used in the altar of Hieron II.51Standing satyrsand maenads were used as supportive figures in the theater at letas, Italy, of ca. 300 B.C.52 The kneeling position with both arms raised is common, as illustrated by

silenoi aththe ends of the seats in the Small Theater at Pompeii and at Pietrabbondante.53In the theater at Segesta of ca. 100 B.C., erected over a grotto of Pan, two engaged figures of Pan stand

against the front faces of the paraskenia.Their larger counterparts in Rome, which stood with one arm raised against pilasters,probablydecorated the Theater of Pompey in a refurbishing of the 2nd century A.C.54

In Greece, two archaistic statues of Dionysos, which appear to be supportive figures, were found in the theater at Trachones near Athens and have been tentatively dated to the late 4th century B.C.55 Two standing silenoi from the Delos theater were constructed against piers as

architecturalsupports,and kneeling satyrsdecorated the orthostatesof a large altarof Dionysos.56 One of the most impressive support figures from Greece is the Late Hellenistic poros telamon from Thessaloniki.57The "PersianStoa" in Sparta, unfortunately of uncertain date, may have been a key monument for establishing the tradition of telamones in Greece.58 The Theater of Dionysos in Athens presents an extensive use of silenoi as architectural supports.59In addition to the kneeling figures that were reused as supports for the stage, three sizes of standing supportive figures exist: at least four smaller silenoi are indicated, two of larger size, and two on colossal scale. The large and colossal pairs were restored by Versakis on the third and second stories of the scaenae frons, respectively.60 High-relief figures against piers like those from the theater at Ephesos are often arranged in freer poses than other standing architectural supports, and it may be pier figures of this sort that have, in part, influenced the asymmetrically posed silenoi of the Corinth Theater facade.61 A sense of motion in otherwise static figures is also conveyed by the satyr piers from Kyzikos, found not far from the theater, of the late 2nd or early 3rd century A.c.62 The piers at Sparta that once decorated the theater, with hip herms of Herakles in a frontal pose, attest the tradition of sup51. Rizzo 1923, pp. 97-105, figs. 42 (maenad), 43, 44 (satyr/ telamon), pl. 6 (maenad), 3rd century B.C.;Langlotz 1965, pl. 156 (maenad), probablyfrom a Roman restorationof the theater (p. 301); Castiglione 1975, p. 214; Polacco and Anti 1981, p. 196;Ridgway1990a, pp. 177, 197, 205, note 27; Isler-Kerenyi 1976, p. 39, pls. 22:1-2, 23:1 (female), 22:3 (male). For architectural support figures, cf. also Centuripe, from a Hellenistic house (Castiglione1975, p. 214, fig. 210); and Monte Scaglioso, in Reggio, Hellenistic from an unknown building, standing, with both arms raised (Schmidt 1982, p. 116, pl. 28). 52. Bloesch and Isler 1974, pl. 29; Isler-Kerenyi1976, esp. p. 35; Ridgway1990a, pp. 176-177, 204-205, note 26, pls. 81-82. 53. Pompeii: Castiglione 1975, p. 216, figs. 220, 221; Bieber 1961a, fig. 615. Pietrabbondante:Castiglione 1975, p. 216, fig. 216. Cf. also the kneeling silenoi/telamones from the area of the Bathsof Caracallain Rome (MusNazRom, I, 7:2, nos. XI, 20; XI, 21; XI, 22), dated late 1st to early 2nd century A.C. 54. Segesta:Gerkan 1952, p. 86; Schmidt 1982, p. 126, note 774;Bieber 1961a,p. 170, fig. 603. Pompey'sTheater,in Capitoline Museums:Bieber 1961a, p. 170, fig. 604:a, b; Helbig4,II, no. 1192.A pillarfigure also comes from the theaterin Falerone: Hommel 1954,p. 69, no. 21. See alsoFuchs 1987and Castiglione 1975 for supportfiguresfrom Tarentum,Lecce, Bolsena,Malta, Apollonia (in Tirana), and elsewhere. 55. Schmidt 1982, p. 216, note 795;Tzachou-Alexandri1980. 56. Marcade 1969, pp. 198-199, 448-449, pls. 22 (silenoi), 24 (satyrs). 57. Thessaloniki I, pp. 58-60, no. 39. 58. Paus. 3.11.3; Vitr. 1.1.6. See Schmidt 1982, pp. 23, 132, 146, and p. 129, for dating possiblypost-Hellenistic;Schneider 1986, pl. 33:2, 3, for illustrations of the "PersianStoa";and Waywelland Wilkes 1994, pp. 405-414, and 429-432, for the

speculation that the stoa was restored ca. A.D. 130. 59. Herbig 1935; Sturgeon 1977, pp. 48-50. 60. See the reconstruction by Versakis (1909, p. 220, fig. 31). See also Gerkan 1941. The four smaller figures: Herbig 1935, figs. 5, 6, pl. 2:2;fig. 7, pl. 3:1, 2; fig. 8, pl. 3:3-4; fig. 9, pls. 4:1-2,11. The large satyrpier (restoredH. 2.0 m): Herbig 1935, fig. 1, pl. 1. The colossal silenos pier (restored H. 2.8-3.0 m): Herbig 1935, fig. 3, pls. 2:1, 4:4. Schmidt (1982, p. 124) dates the Athens silenoi to the Hadrianicperiod. Cf. the four colossal support silenoi in the Louvre,with hands on the hips like the Athens theater silenoi (Bulle 1928, p. 239; Schmidt-Colinet 1977, no. M 80; Schmidt 1982, p. 213, note 756); and cf. their counterpart in Stockholm (Reinach 1897-1930, I, p. 410:1; Clarac1841-1853, IV,no. 1725A,pl. 721). 61. Eichler 1958; Schmidt 1982, pp. 130-131, pl. 36:2; Hartswick1986. For a useful list of column figures and pier figures,see Hommel 1954, pp. 68-70. The standingsilenoi have been dated to the Late Hadrianicto EarlyAntonine period by Herbig (1935, p. 35) and Despinis (2003, pp. 140-141); Schmidt (1982, p. 127) suggested that the kneeling figures supporting the stage may originallyhave been intended as parodies of depictions of Atlas. Other kneeling silenoi occur in Paris,in the Louvre (Bieber 1961a,fig. 753), and in Rome, in the Capitoline Museums (Bieber 1961a, fig. 754; Helbig4, II, no. 1795). See also the silenos support from the scaenae frons of the odeion at Ephesos (London, BM 1257:EphesosX, i, pp. 75-76, no. 56, pl. 37). 62. Devambez 1937; Schmidt 1982, p. 130, pl. 33:2. Cf. the Amazonpier figurefrom the Villaof HerodesAtticusat Loukou, Athens, NM 705 (Karouzou 1969, pp. 256-257; Tobin 1997, pp. 343-344; Schmidt 1982, pp. 131, 132, pls. 36:1, 37; Weber 1976, pp. 61-62, 78).

RELIEF DECORATION

37

portive pier figures in Roman theaters in Greece from the late 2nd or early 3rd century A.C.63 In Italy, the elaborate mid-2nd-century A.C. sarcophagus from Velletri, which has a theaterlike fa-

cade, contains multiple support figures-caryatids and kneeling silenoi.64 The Silenos piers from the Theater form part of an extended tradition of architectural sup-

ports in Roman Corinth. Two captives' capitals contain kneeling figures wearing Phrygian caps and short chitons at the four corners.65 Each figure kneels on one knee and raises one arm,

placing the other on the raised knee (the four alternating raised arms and knees). As they were found in front and to the east of the West Shops, it is uncertain whether they should be associated with a building or if they supported independent monuments. Schmidt-Colinet dated them

to the very late 1st century A.C., but Hesberg's date in the Augustan period seems well founded.66 Two caryatids that copy those from the Erechtheion in Athens survive in part: a relatively complete torso and a fragmentary head.67 Dated to the mid-ist century A.C., their original location at

Corinth is unclear. Colossal male and female pier figures decorated the Captives' Facade, erected on the north side of the Forum in the mid-2nd century A.C.68On this monument, possibly eight "captives"stood

on sculptured bases against piers in the second story over a colonnade. The head of a caryatid with spiral-fluted polos, which is dated to the Severan period from its highly polished, almost

alabasterlike appearance, once supported a fountain.69In addition, an over life-size archaistic Athena found in the Odeion is one of a pair that formed part of the 3rd-centuryfacade (ca. A.D. 225).70Smallersupport figures are numerous at Corinth in the form of trapezophoroi, and some archaisticfigures are used as statuarysupports.71 In summary,architecturalsupports are a common element of theater decoration in both the West and the East in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, but they do not occur in all theaters. Silenoi occur as support figures in Syracuse and Delos in the Hellenistic period, and Roman

examples come from theaters in Ephesos and Athens as well as in Corinth. RELIEF DECORATION

The reliefs from the Corinth Theater were presented with their reconstruction in CorinthIX, ii, in 1977. Since that time, a number of new theater reliefs and publications have appeared that greatly enhance our knowledge of this architectural form, one that was not recognized at the

time these sculptures were found and was not investigated until the 1970s and 1980s. Most notable among these publications are M. Fuchs's investigations of western Roman theater decoration (1987), D'Andria's and Ritti's publication of the Apollo and Artemis relief cycles at Hierapolis

63. LIMCIV,p. 781, nos. 1109-1111, s.v.Herakles(Palagia); Palagia 1989, p. 125, pls. 45-50. 64. Bartoccini 1958; Lawrence 1965; Strong 1988, p. 190, fig. 122; Kleiner 1992, p. 259, figs. 229, 230. 65. CapitalA-977/S-694 (head): CorinthIX, no. 91; Broneer 1935, p. 66, pl. 19:A;Ridgway1981b, p. 445, where a 3rd-century A.C. date is tentativelyproposed; Mercklin 1962, p. 151, no. 449a, b, figs. 873-875 (no date). Capital A-457/S-3713: Morgan 1936, p. 473, fig. 9; Ridgway1981b, p. 445, where described as "cruder";Hesberg 1981-1982, pp. 60-61, fig. 21, dated Augustan; Schmidt-Colinet1977, p. 260, no. M 71. See also S-2610, of unknown provenance, for a knee from a possible third capital. 66. Hesberg 1981-1982, pp. 60-61, fig. 21. 67. Williamsand Fischer1975, pp. 22-23, no. 26, pl. 8 (torso, after the sixth Erechtheion kore); no. 27, pl. 7 (head). The torso has been dated to the mid-lst century A.C. by Williams (Williamsand Fisher 1975, p. 23), earlier by Schmidt (1982, p. 205, note 632, also pp. 105, 106); Ridgway(1981b, p. 439) prefers an Antonine date. With the head is associated a sandaled right foot, S-1939 (Williamsand Fisher 1975, pl. 7), and

two arm fragments,S-1955and S-1779.The polos of a caryatid, A-74-6 (unpublished), was also found in the western area of the Forum.For another possible caryatidfragmentof archaistic style, cf. S-2832from the Gymnasium(unpublished). 68. CorinthIX,pp. 101-105, nos. 217-225; Stillwellin Corinth I, ii, pp. 55-88. On early-3rd-centuryA.C. date, see Williams, cited in Megaw1963-1964, p. 7;Vermeule1968,pp. 83-88; 1986 (Antonineto Severan);and Ridgway1981b,p. 444. On mid-2ndcenturyA.C. date, see Schmidt 1982, pp. 132-133, pls. 34, 35:1, 2; Heilmeyer 1970, pp. 70-71; and Strong 1953, p. 134, note 50. On two phases of the facade, see Hesberg 1983, pls. 44-46. See also Schneider 1986, pp. 92, 109, 112, 128-131, pl. 37:2, A.D. 160/170; Despinis 2003, p. 140, pre-mid-2nd-centuryA.C. 69. Robinson 1962,pp. 114-115, pl. 42:a,found in the southwest Forum; Ridgway 1981b, p. 445, 3rd century A.C.;Schmidt 1982, p. 110.

70. CorinthX, pp. 117-124; Ridgway1981b, pp. 445-446; 1993a, pp. 146, 472, figs. 11.146, 147; Zagdoun 1989, no. 153. 71. On trapezophoroi,see the catalogue entryfor 70 below. On archaistic figures, see, e.g., S-2503, Dionysos of Jacobsen type (LIMCIII, p. 436, no. 126c, s.v. Dionysos [Gasparri]).

38

SCULPTURAL ASSEMBLAGES IN THEATERS

(1985), and the discovery of the Dionysiac friezes at Nysa, discussed by Lindner (1994). With the reconstruction proposed here, the reliefs from the Corinth Theater can now be seen as part of a large sculptural assemblage. The design at Corinth, however, differs from arrangements in the West, as at Fiesole, and in Asia Minor, as at Perge, Side, Hierapolis, and Nysa, so far as can be ascertained from the fragmentary remains. At Corinth, the designer made a deliberate choice in placing the Amazonomachy and Gigantomachy battles, subjects that have an established use as continuous friezes, in rectangular reliefs attached to the column podia in a noncontiguous format. This style of presentation as isolated duels is typical of the Labors of Herakles, for the Labors occur at separate times, a feature that may partly have affected their use in metopal rather than frieze decoration. Herakles is also a favored Peloponnesian hero, so his depiction in architectural sculpture is more common in the regions that prefer the Doric order. The choice of Herakles' triumphs for the Corinth Theater may have contributed to the representation of the other two relief subjects in separated, duel formats. The reliefs are attached to the column podia or between the columns, resembling parapets. They help establish a strong sense of regularity and articulation of decorated versus undecorated spaces across each level. FREESTANDING

SCULPTURE IN COLUMNAR FACADES

The picture created at Corinth of a Roman columnar facade filled with statuary forms part of a rich tradition that develops from the 4th century B.C. and Hellenistic period. In the 5th century B.C., freestanding sculpture was set up on the peristyles of temples. Evidence of such dedications exists, for instance, for the west steps of the Parthenon, for the Propylaia, and for the Temple of Zeus at Olympia.72As Pausanias (2.1.7) indicates with regard to the Temple of Poseidon at Isthmia and elsewhere, the practice continues into Roman times. It is in the 4th century B.C. that there emerges in Asia Minor the practice of setting freestanding statues between and in line with peristyle columns. The best-known example of this approach is the funerary Nereid Monument from Xanthos, in which statues stood on a high podium, eminently visible from below.73 A comparable depiction of figures within a colonnade leaning against a balustrade is presented in relief format on the Mourning Women sarcophagus, from the cemetery at Sidon, carved ca. 360 B.C.74Sculptures from the Mausoleum at Halicarnassos, ca. 350 B.C., are much more fragmentary, but enough survives for Waywell to estimate the total number of statues at 314 or 330 and to propose that they stood onisix levels of the building, with the colossal figures as possible ancestor portraits set between the columns.75 The practice of setting figures between columns expands in the great altars of Asia Minor of the Hellenistic period. Freestanding statues found in the precinct of the Great Altar at Pergamon have been assigned to the intercolumniations. The altars of Athena at Priene and Artemis at Magnesia, for example, would have given an analogous impression with high-relief figures.76 Less certain possibilities include the Altar of Artemis at Ephesos and one at Sardis that is known from a coin.77 Similar arrangements exist in painting and the minor arts. For example, large figures stand between columns on the facade of the Lefkadia Tomb in Macedonia of ca. 300 B.C.78A similar 72. Parthenon steps:see Stevens'sreconstructionin Travlos 1971, figs. 565, 624. Propylaia:Travlos1971, fig. 612. Olympia, Temple of Zeus:Mallwitz1972, fig. 170, viewof model with statues in front. 73. Demargne and Childs 1989, pl. 76 (facade). 74. Lippold 1950, p. 231, pl. 82:1;Lullies and Hirmer 1960, pls. 207-209; Fleischer 1983, pp. 61-65, an Attic workshop. 75. Waywell1978, pp. 40-43, 54-62. See also the arrangement proposed byJeppesen (1989, fig. 8), and the new reconstruction drawingby Bird (Waywell1989, fig. 11). 76. Pergamon: AvP VII, i, pp. 74-76, nos. 47-97; Martin, in Charbonneaux, Martin,and Villard 1973, p. 50; Radt 1988,

fig. 77; Hoepfner 1997, foldouts 3, 4. Priene: Ridgway1990a, pp. 164-167; Webb 1996, p. 99. Magnesia: Charbonneaux, Martin, and Villard 1973, p. 50, figs. 401-403; Webb 1996, pp. 94-98, figs. 67-70. 77. Ephesos: Bammer 1968, figs. 28, 32 (reconstructions); 1976, where the high-relieffigure is called an Amazon;against his reconstruction, see Kuhn 1984, esp. pp. 202-203. Sardis: Price and Trell 1977, p. 139, fig. 244. 78. Lefkadia:Pollitt 1986, fig. 201; Charbonneaux,Martin, and Villard 1973, p. 56, fig. 53, and p. 61 on the development of Hellenistic facades.

FREESTANDING

SCULPTURE IN COLUMNAR FACADES

39

disposition occurs in paintings from the great hall of the Villa of P. F. Sinistor at Boscoreale, which would have been influenced by the Hellenistic traditionsof sculpture as well as painting.79 The colonnades of stoas, gymnasia,and palaestraewere also enlivened by sculpture. The most illuminating evidence for this custom is provided by inscriptions from Delos that list statues, as well as other dedications, set up in the gymnasium.80 In the Roman period a number of building types employed columnar facades, many of which would have served as backdrops for the display of sculpture.81Foremost in importance for this developing tradition is Augustus'sForum in Rome. There the exedras and colonnades to the left of the Temple of MarsUltor contained statues of Aeneas and the other kings of Alba Longa as well as Augustus'sancestors, theJulian family;to the right stood Romulus and the other kings of Rome, followed by the great men of Rome.82In the EarlyImperial period, an elaborate sculptural program was developed for the Sebasteion at Aphrodisias that included single figures in high relief between the columns of the second story.83Subsequently,a number of building types with columnar facades had sculptural displays,for example, nymphaea, gateways,libraries,and imperial halls.84The Forum of Trajanin Rome presents captive Dacians in the second-storycolonnades; while in the Nymphaeum of Herodes Atticus at Olympia, sculptures of the emperor and his family are placed on the lower level, the donor and his family on the upper, with Zeus in the middle of each.85 Roman tomb monuments frequently make use of sculptures.The reliefs from the Tomb of the Haterii depict figures standing between piers on the side of a temple.86Some Roman sarcophagi also employ "peopled" colonnades-notably the Velletri sarcophagus of the mid-2nd century the Melfi sarcophagus of Asiatic type of the late 1st century A.C., and Sidamara sarcophagi of the Severan period-a practice that culminates in the sarcophagus ofJunius Bassus of A.D. 359.87

A.C.,

In monuments such as the Augustan Forum in Rome or the Sebasteion at Aphrodisias, statuaryin a colonnade would have been seen from many vantage points, while in other cases, as with nymphaea and the Celsus Library,decorated screen wallswere placed in key positions in the city to provide an uncluttered view from a distance down a major street. The Roman theater's decorated scaenae frons in many waysfunctions in an analogous fashion. The Roman theater, therefore, forms an integral part of the Roman tradition of placing sculptural displays on columnar architecture. Unfortunately, most theaters are so poorly preserved that it is difficult enough to restore the architecture, not to mention the sculptural decoration. As many theaters were the object of early excavations, the records of sculptures found in them are inevitablyincomplete. An attempt can be made to visualize the complete scaenae frons filled with columns and sculptures by considering the better-preserved theaters, such as those at 79. Boscoreale: Lehmann 1953, esp. figs. 24, 25, 27, and pp. 136-137. 80. Delos: Wrede 1985, pp. 34-36, 59-62; Audiatin Delos28, pp. 96-97; Hamilton 2000, p. 193. See also Coulton 1976, p. 9, notes 2, 3, and p. 13, note 3. 81. For columnar facades with sculpturaldisplays,see, e.g., Lyttelton 1974, pls. 1 (Petra,the Khazn6), 190 (Miletos,model of nymphaeum); and MacDonald 1986, figs. 134, 135 (Petra), 180 (Side). 82. Zanker 1988, pp. 210-215. Cf. the marble relief with columnar facade from Castel Sant'Elia,dated Claudian, with statues of Apollo and six Muses in the second-story niches (Bieber 1961a, pp. 180, 193, fig. 629). 83. Smith 1987, 1988b, 1990b; Rockwell 1990. 84. On nymphaea, see Kapossy 1969, Walker 1979, and Schmidt-Colinet 1985. Athens, Agora: Bol 1984, figs. 41, 42; Thompson 1976, p. 151, fig. 77. Miletos: Boethius and WardPerkins 1970, pp. 387, 394, 406, fig. 153 (reconstruction drawing); Lyttelton 1974, pl. 190;Walker1987, p. 71, note 37. Side: Boethius and Ward-Perkins1970, p. 407, fig. 154; Mansel 1963, fig. 37. Gerasa:Bol 1984, p. 79, pl. 70:2.LeptisMagna:Bol 1984,

p. 79, pl. 70:1;Squarciapino1966, p. 95, pl. H. Gateways:Athens, Arch of Hadrian: Boethius and WardPerkins1970,p. 382, pl. 195,withstatueson the columns;Travlos 1971, p. 253, with possible statues of Theseus and Hadrian in the center arch. Perge, South Gate, later a nymphaeum:Boethius and Ward-Perkins1970, p. 409, pl. 212; Mansel 1956, pp. 99-120; 1975, esp. pls. 67-70. Libraryof Celsus, Ephesos:Akurgal 1987, pp. 130-131, pl. 47, dated ca. A.D. 110, with figures in lower story niches, as reconstructed in 1978; MacDonald 1986, fig. 168. Imperial halls: Side: Yegfil 1982, esp. fig. 21; Mansel 1963, pp. 109-121, fig. 90 (restoration). Aphrodisias: Smith 1987, 1988b. 85. Rome:Strong1988,p. 141,fig. 94; Zanker1970;Waelkens 1985. Olympia: Bol 1984, figs. 29, 30, Appendix, pp. 76-82, 201, pls. 4, 5, for discussion of comparativeworks. 86. Toynbee 1971, fig. 17; Strong 1988, fig. 76; MacDonald 1986, fig. 93. Cf. the Tomb of Asfionius Rufus (Toynbee 1971, pp. 125-126, 131, fig. 37), restorationin the SarsinaMuseum. 87. Strong 1988, figs. 122, 125, 168, 224.

40

SCULPTURAL ASSEMBLAGES IN THEATERS

Augusta Emerita in Spain, at Leptis Magna and Sabratha in North Africa, and at Aphrodisias and Hierapolis in Asia Minor, in addition to the columnar facades mentioned above.88 M. Fuchs's study provides a useful description and illustration of the many sculptures that once decorated facades and other areas within theatrical complexes in Italy and the western provinces.89 Augmenting the modern remains is Pliny's description (HN34.36; 36.114-115) of the wooden theater of M. Aemilius Scaurus, built in 58 B.C., which contained at least 3,000 bronze statues set between the 360 marble, glass, and gilded wooden columns on the facade.90 Even if these numbers are inflated, the sense of impressive opulence is clear. 88. Augusta Emerita: MacDonald 1986, fig. 124; Bieber 1961a, figs. 680-682. Leptis Magna: Bieber 1961a, figs. 696699; Caputo and Traversari1976. Sabratha:Bieber 1961a, figs. 694-695; Caputo 1959. Aphrodisias: Erim and Smith 1991. Hierapolis:HierapolisI, II, III;Chuvin 1987.

89. Fuchs 1987. 90. Vitruvius(7.5.5) also describes a painted scaenae frons, in the ecclesiasterionat TrallesbyApaturiusof Alabanda,which includes centaurs supporting the architraves.

3

DEDICATIONS

OF ROMAN THEATERS IN THE GREEK EAST

QUESTIONS

OF PATRONAGE

Investigation of the inscriptions found in the Corinth Theater

provides information important for understanding the dedications of the Theater and thereby aids in positing a fuller context for the Theater sculptures. The inscriptions may help establish the identity of the honorand of the building, the patron(s), and aspects of building practice, such as whether the Theater complex was built at one time or in sections. In the past, the inscriptions found in the Theater have been considered too fragmentary to provide much assistance in its historical interpretation. My recent investigations, in which all inscriptions that could be identified as coming from the Theater excavations were studied (for a list, see the Appendix), have resulted in new joins and shed new light on the building's history. The inscriptions from the Theater are very fragmentary, but their significance can be recognized more fully if considered against the background of private dedications of theaters elsewhere in Greek and Roman times. HONORANDS

OF THEATERS

In the Greek period, theaters were frequently associated in ritual and other public activity with Dionysos, for the theater is closely tied to contests in his honor. For example, the Greek theater on the South Slope of the Athenian Akropolis was built in a sanctuary which included a temple and altar dedicated to Dionysos Eleutherios. Sometimes a theater would be dedicated to Dionysos and another deity, as at Orchomenos in Boiotia, where it was presented to Dionysos and to the Charites, both honored in regular festivals.' Other deities could be indicated as important to a theater by the dedication, by the presence of a statue in the theater, by a festival in honor of the deity, or by an associated sanctuary. Apollo, for example, is the honorand of the theaters at Delphi and Delos (with Dionysos, the Charites, Artemis, and Leto at the latter). Asklepios is the focus of the theater at Epidauros; Amphiaraos at Oropos; Athena at Lindos; Eros at Thespiai; Herakles at Ambrakia; Hermes at Magnesia; the Muses at Miletos, Syracuse, and Thespiai; Nike possibly at Cyrene and Sparta; and Zeus at Priene and Syracuse.2 In the Latin West, Roman theaters were frequently dedicated to the emperor. Primary examples include the theaters at Falerio, Tarraco, Thugga, and Leptis Magna, and the odeion at Carthage.3 But in the Roman period in the East, theaters more typically appear to have been dedicated to the most important local deity and the emperor, sometimes with his family, and the dedications sometimes comprise an important civic component-the people or the city. An inscription records that the Theater of Dionysos of the 1st century A.C. in Athens is dedicated to Dionysos Eleutherios and to Nero.4 The theater at Ephesos is dedicated at different times to the demosalone, to the city's patron deity, Ephesian Artemis, and to the emperor: Nero, then Domitian, 1. Athens theater: Schwingenstein 1977, pp. 25-48. Orchomenos: Amandry and Spyropoulos 1974, esp. pp. 180-183; IG VII 3171. 2. Schwingenstein 1977, pp. 49-62 (on pp. 57, 58, note that

the honoring of Nemesis and Tyche in theaters is less certain). 3. Fuchs 1987, p. 156, note 302. 4. Bulle in Fiechter 1936, pp. 60-66, figs. 41-43; CIG II-III 3182.

42

DEDICATIONS

OF ROMAN THEATERS IN THE GREEK EAST

then Trajan.The dedication of the theater at Aspendos is more broadly stated as honoring the gods of the country and the imperial house. The theater at Aphrodisiasis dedicated to Aphrodite and later also to Antoninus Pius and MarcusAurelius; that at lasos to Dionysos and the demos.5 The Severan phase of the theater at Hierapolis is dedicated to Apollo Archegetes and to the other gods of the country, to the emperor Septimius Severus, the divine Marcus Aurelius, Geta (erased), the divine Julia Domna, and the entire imperial household.6 Enough variability exists,

in other words, to prevent ready assumptions about the honorand of a Roman theater in the East. DONORS AND BUILDING PRACTICE IN THEATERS IN THE GREEK EAST

The donors of theaters in the Greek East and the building practices employed there are also illustrated in inscriptions. As with other types of public buildings, the private funding of theater construction has a long history.7 The earliest known dedicatory inscription from a theater in Greece comes from Megalopolis, where the theater has been dated to the mid-4th century B.C.A marble seat there carries an inscription that records the dedication of the prohedria and the gutter by a private individual, Antiochos. The tradition of private benefaction of sections of the

theater appears to begin when sections were first built of stone, following in the tradition of

private support for dramatic production in the 5th century.8 The building accounts for the theater in the Sanctuary of Asklepios at Epidauros, partially preserved on a stele, list payment for the tiers of seats, thrones, and the theater itself, as well as columns and doors. This record is an account posted by the finance board of the sanctuary rather than a dedication, but it illustrates

the details of funding elsewhere preserved in dedications.9 In Italy also, the earliest theaters are private donations, such as those of Scaurus, Pompey, and Balbus in Rome (in 58, 55, and 19-13 B.C.), or the theaters built by Appius Claudius Pulcher at Herculaneum (ca. 32 B.C.) and M. Holconius Rufus at Pompeii (2/1 B.C.). In the 2nd century A.C., private euergetism continued to support some theaters, as at Timgad and Leptis Magna in North Africa, but imperial restorations are also known, as at Emerita in Spain, Ostia, and Antioch in Syria, primarily in places where the original theater was constructed under Augustus. In addi-

tion, Trajanrestores the odeion at Gortynaon Crete. There is also the notice in the HistoriaAugustathat Hadrian was fond of giving buildings, including theaters, to cities.10 Smaller theaters, like those in the Lyciantowns of Limyra,Xanthos, and Tlos, could be funded in their entirety by a single primary donor, in this case, Opramoas from Rhodiapolis. At Tlos,

however, the priest of Dionysos and the high priest of the Cabiri as well as private citizens provided smaller contributions in amounts ranging from 100 to 3,000 drachmai.11 The theater at Patara presents the notable case of a father dedicating what seems to be the entire theater and its 5. Ephesos: Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, IV, Appendix II, pp. 212-222, nos. 12-20. Aspendos: Bernardi Ferrero 19661974, IV, Appendix II, p. 231, no. 26. Aphrodisias: Reynolds 1982, p. 162; 1991, pp. 15, 16. Iasos: Hicks 1887, pp. 98-100; Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, IV, Appendix II, p. 229, no. 24. 6. Hierapolis , pp. 108-113. 7. See MacMullen 2000, pp. 7-10, 13, 16-22, on the transmission of western Roman forms to the East, and pp. 67-73 on patronage of Roman generals, governors, and local magistrates in Spain. 8. For the Megalopolis theater, see Gardner 1892, pp. 8, 38, 74-76, 122-126, and Fiechter 1931, pp. 20-21, 30. Inscriptions on seats can also indicate seating sections, as, e.g., by tribe (Megalopolis, Hierapolis), gender, priesthood (Athens), or names of important people and officials (Larissa, Orchomenos in Arkadia, Priene). Divisional seating may also occur by collegia, age group, or marital status, and special seats may be desig-

nated for victorsin crowngames. Moreover,some theater seats have manumission inscriptions (Oiniadai, Buthrotum, Epidamnos); see Rawson1987, esp. pp. 98-114. On personal dedications of buildings in the Classicalperiod, see Umholz 2002. 9. Burford 1966, pp. 296-300; 1969, pp. 75-76, 83. 10. On donations of theaters in the West, see Fuchs 1987, pp. 157-160. On Gortyna:ICrIV 331, in Latin;Sanders 1982, pp. 63,65-66. On Hadrian'sgifts of buildings to cities, see SHA, Hadr. 19.9, 20.4, and Boatwright 2000, esp. pp. 204-209. Hadrianis cited as possiblyrestoringonly two theaters,those at ArgosandAugustaEmerita;on thissubject,see Boatwright2000, p. 125, note 62, where she questions the latter. 11. Limyra:Bean 1978, p. 144;BernardiFerrero1966-1974, II, pp. 155-170. Xanthos:Bean 1978, p. 55. Tlos: Bean 1978, p. 67; Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 191-196; IV,Appendix II, pp. 234-235, no. 29.

DONORS AND BUILDING PRACTICE

43

decoration in the early 2nd century A.C., and he is followed by his daughter, who names the individual parts of her benefaction to the city in A.D. 147.12The donation, which is prominently displayed on the outer wall of the cavea and records the dedication to Antoninus Pius, lists the

combined funding for the proscenium and its decoration; the erection of statues and sculptures;

and the construction and revetment in marble of the logeion (pulpitum), of the eleventh stair of

the second diazoma, and of the velaria. A similar naming of specific parts in the Libraryof Pantainos in Athens (ca. A.D. 100), which has a single donor, suggests that this practice may reflect standard methods of contracting the work.13 For many theaters a sequential and sectional process of building, repairing, and decorating is indicated. This appears customary, especially in the larger theaters at Ephesos, Aphrodisias, and Hierapolis in Phrygia, which witnessed heavy, continuous use over a long period. The theater at Ephesos has eight phases that are documented epigraphically: two in the 1st century A.C. that were paid for by the city, the rest in later centuries by private patrons.14 The theater at Aphrodisias preserves at least five phases between the Early Augustan and Caracallan periods, all resulting from private benefaction. At Hierapolis, there is evidence for five possible building phases, each associated with the name of an emperor. A primary donor of a later phase is Septimius Severus, whose benefaction

is highlighted

by the representation

of the emperor himself

in relief, directly over the porta regia. In addition, a generous contribution made by the purple dye-workers' guild supported frons.15

the decoration

of the first and second stories of the scaenae

It is known from inscriptions in certain other theaters that the cavea or individual sections of it with the stairs were built separately. Building dedications may indicate separate benefactions for the gutter, prohedria, stage, scaenae frons, velaria, nets for the velaria, awning, wooden furnishings, entrances,

supports for the analemmata,

vaults supporting

the seats, diazoma, peristyle

courts, and paving for the orchestra or adjoining plazas, as well as paneling for stage fronts and orchestra walls, akroteria, and decorations of the scaenae frons-a minimum of 17 different categories of gift.16That is, donors might pay for all areas built of stone, for hidden supports and vaults as well as visible areas, for functional as well as nonfunctional elements, and for the trappings that wear out over a period of time, like the velaria and netting. It is not clear from the surviving evidence if the donor played a role in choosing the architectural plan or the type of ornamentation put on the scaenae frons, choices that are an important part of creating an image

of the city. Decisions about the plan or decoration of a theater may have been considered by the city council, as the authorizations

of statues that were erected in public areas. The appearance

of

the office of curatorannonae among the Corinth Theater inscriptions is a reminder of the inherently political and public functions of the theater.17 Dedicatory inscriptions occur in a number of locations in Roman theatrical complexes in the Greek East. These were set up in prominent places where they would be highly visible, and frequently they appear on or close to that part of the structure specified as having been built or repaired. In addition, some dedicatory inscriptions are inscribed on stelai or statue bases found 12. Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, II, pp. 123-133; IV, Appendix II, pp. 210-211, no. 11; Bean 1978, p. 88; TAMII 408. 13. See, e.g., Shear 1981, pp. 370-371, with references. 14. Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 47-66; IV, Appendix II (by Gallina), pp. 212-222, nos. 12-20. On prosperity at Ephesos and private euergetism in Asia Minor, see, e.g., Magie 1950, pp. 582-584, 591-592, 651-658. For inscriptions from the theater, see Hicks 1890, pp. 67-291, and EphesosII, pp. 95203. A number of inscriptions originally displayed in the Artemision were later incorporated into the theater, where they served as an archive. 15. Aphrodisias: Reynolds 1991. See Roueche 1991, pp. 99100, for a benefaction possibly in the 4th century A.C. by an Androcles, and the addition of a central seat of honor or loggia

in the cavea; on the scaenae frons, see Chaisemartin and Theodorescu 1991 and Theodorescu 1996. See Reynolds 1991, pp. 16-18, on terminology, p. 21, on Augustus's statue; see also Reynolds 1982, pp. 33-37, on the archive wall. Hierapolis: on the Flavian phase, Verzone 1978, p. 422, fig. 40; HierapolisI, p. 123, pl. 20:c. See HierapolisI, pp. 105-125, for inscriptions from the Severan period. A study of the Hadrianic and 4th-century A.C. inscriptions is forthcoming; Bean 1971,

pp. 242-243. 16. On benefactions in theaters, see Fuchs 1987, pp. 155156; Sturgeon 2004. For discussions of patronage, see Badian 1985, Veyne 1990, and Bremen 1993; for the concept of reciprocity inherent in such public duties, see Reden 1995. 17.1-2297: CorinthVIII, iii, p. 100, no. 234 (P1. 2:f).

44

DEDICATIONS

OF ROMAN THEATERS IN THE GREEK EAST

near the primary entrances, such as the parodoi, and may denote either the entrance or the entire theater, as this is not always specified in the inscription. On the scaenae frons, dedicatory inscriptions are regularly placed in the entablature on the architrave or frieze courses. Like the Theater at Corinth, a number of theaters in the Greek East employ this highly visible location, such as at Ephesos, Miletos, Aphrodisias, Hierapolis, Troy, Athens, and Sparta.18The theater at Curium in Cyprus has its dedication running across both architrave and frieze sections, which may also be true of the Hellenistic theater at Orchomenos in Boiotia. Since the Orchomenos theater has yet to be fully studied, it is unclear whether the remains of entablature excavated there derive from the theater building or from a choregic monument, of which many have been found at the site.19Dedicatory inscriptions are also carved on cornice blocks, as at Aphrodisias and Corinth, though in the case of Corinth, the inscription may derive from a smaller dedication, such as for one of the entrances or part of the cavea, rather than the dedication of the entire scaenae frons.20 At Aphrodisias, dedicatory inscriptions also appear on the entablature of the Doric order supporting the stage and on the base of the Ionic order from the first story of the scaenae frons.21 Elsewhere, evidence survives for dedications placed over entrances, including that of the parodos at Pergamon, the aditus maximi at Augusta Emerita and Leptis Magna, and the sides of the stage building at Aspendos.22 In some cases the vaults leading into the upper cavea form major benefactions, as two examples in the Ephesos theater.23 Various walls have benefactions prominently displayed on them. The outer wall of the cavea at Patara displays a benefaction, whose lengthy inscription runs over several courses; at Side, an inscription refers to the pillars and arches immediately below it. At Ephesos, a large portion of a parodos wall is covered, not by the dedication of the building, but by the detailed record of the bequest by C. Vibius Salutaris made in A.D. 103/4. This decree, which extends for nearly five meters on the east wall of the south parodos, is arranged in six columns and 568 lines. Salutaris's benefaction provided for the foundation of a new ritual with religious processions that began in the Temple of Artemis, proceeded to the theater along designated streets, then returned to the temple. Archive walls, which record matters of civic record, occur in the theaters at Sparta and Aphrodisias.24 When marble circuit walls were inserted into the orchestra to adapt a theater for use as an arena, these walls themselves could receive dedicatory inscriptions, as at Mytilene, Philippi, and Thasos.25 18. Ephesos, architrave: Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 47-66; IV, Appendix II, pp. 213-214, no. 13. Miletos, inscription from first Roman stage on architrave: Mitchell 1987, p. 351, note 114; Herrmann in Milet VI, ii, pp. 119-120, no. 928. The proskenion was a gift by M. Aurelius Thelymitres, recorded on a marble base (Milet VI, ii, p. 123, no. 939). Aphrodisias, architrave-frieze: Reynolds 1982, pp. 161-162; 1991, pp. 15, 16. Hierapolis, architrave: on the Flavian phase, Verzone 1978, p. 422, fig. 40; HierapolisI, p. 123, pl. 20:c; on the Severan phase, HierapolisI, pp. 105-113; on the Hadrianic and 4th-century A.C. phases, Hierapolis I, pp. 107, 113, and 122-125 for additional fragments. Troy: Rose 1994, pp. 88-93; 1997a, pp. 101-102. On the inscription, Frisch 1975, p. 244, no. 158, pl. 17. Athens: Bulle in Fiechter 1936, pp. 60-66, figs. 41-43; CIG II-III 3182. Sparta, architrave: Woodward 1923-1925, pp. 153-154; IGV 1 691. On inscribed architraves and cornices, see Woodward 19281930, pp. 183-189, 209-220; also Waywell and Wilkes 1995. 19. Curium: Mitchell 1987, p. 355; Mitford 1971, pp. 204207, no. 107. Orchomenos: Amandry and Spyropoulos 1974, pp. 180-183, no. 3, figs. 7-9. 20. Aphrodisias cornice: Reynolds 1991, pp. 18, 19. Corinth cornice (1-2448, PI. 1:f): CorinthII, pp. 114, 136, no. 89; Corinth VIII, iii, pp. 44-45, no. 96, pl. 7. This block differs from the other cornice blocks in being taller, having no dowels in the upper surface, and having a shallow cutting at the back as if to

receive a wooden beam. Therefore, it seems unlikely that it formed part of a series, and it likely stood in an isolated location, for example, over an entrance. 21. On entablature of Doric and base of Ionic, see Reynolds 1991, pp. 15, 16. 22. Pergamon: Radt 1988, pp. 291-292; AvPVIII, i, p. 136, no. 236; Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 23-34. Augusta Emerita: Richmond 1930, pp. 110, 115-116, pl. 6:b. Leptis Magna: Sear 1990, p. 379; Caputo 1987, pp. 24-28, pl. 147:1. Aspendos: Bean 1968, pp. 70-72; Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 161-174; IV, Appendix II, p. 231, no. 26. 23. Ephesos: Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, IV, Appendix II, pp. 212, 216, nos. 12, 15. At Aphrodisias, vaults may be mentioned; see Reynolds 1991, pp. 16-18, 24-25. 24. Patara: Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, IV, Appendix II, pp. 210-211, no. 11; TAMII 408. Side: Bean 1968, pp. 92-94; Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 135-143; Mansel 1963, pp. 122-142 on theater, p. 137 on inscription, p. 138 on mid2nd-century date. Ephesos, Salutaris: Rogers 1991, esp. pp. 1924. Sparta: Woodward 1923-1925, pp. 159-205, archive wall defined on p. 159; 1925-1926, pp. 210-236. Aphrodisias, archive wall: Reynolds 1982, pp. 33-37. 25. Mytilene: Petrakos 1969, pp. 452-458. Philippi: Collart 1928, pp. 97-98, figs. 9, 20-22. Thasos: Pouilloux 1959, pp. 277278; Daux 1967, pp. 50-54.

THE THEATER AT CORINTH

45

Dedications of parts of a theater also occur on stelai, as at Ephesos, where one was found on the terrace before the north analemma, and at Patara, where one was found near an entrance to the theater.26 In addition, dedications occur on bases for statues honoring persons who funded work on the theater, as at Herculaneum, Aphrodisias, and Aspendos, where statues of the donors were erected over the northern and southern entrances into the cavea.27 The unusual size, large amount of stonework, construction of supports for the seats, and marble ornamentation make a theater one of the most expensive buildings in a city. If the figures analyzed by Duncan-Jones are to some degree characteristic, his case study of building inscriptions from the Tunisian city of Thugga may be useful in estimating the cost of the Corinth Theater. According to his estimates, the cost of the theater at Thugga, a city that was fortunate in having a large number of private donors, might be estimated at 600,000 sesterces. This figure may represent 33 times the amount of Thugga's annual income designated for building purposes.28 Corinth, as a larger city and a full Roman colony, would have had greater public revenues. At the same time, the length of Corinth's scaenae frons, ca. 60 m, is 62 percent larger than Thugga's, ca. 37 m. This would mean that building Corinth's theater would have been an even greater financial undertaking. Williams's excavations of the supports of the cavea have shown a series of repairs that appear to have followed the earthquake of A.D. 77 and may have been completed over a 20-year period.29 If a large city like Corinth was faced with the prospect of building its theater over a long period of time, it might have chosen to erect it or repair it one section at a time. It might also have been quite willing to accept benefactions from civic officials for individual parts of the structure. In this context it should be noted that the titles of two civic officials, an aedile and a curator annonae, occur on revetment from the Corinth Theater.30 THE THEATER AT CORINTH Renewed examination of the Theater inscriptions shows that they reveal more about the honorands of the Corinth Theater than was previously realized. Dedications of various types survive from early to late Roman times.3 The earliest is an altar to Julius Caesar as divus (P1. l:a), probably provided with a crowning molding, which may have been maintained for some time. The find context within the Theater is uncertain.32 This altar indicates renewed activity of some kind in the Theater in the earliest days of the colony, when Julius Caesar was honored as founder. The dedication reflects the naming of the Roman colony founded at Corinth by order ofJulius Caesar in 44 B.C. Colonia LausJulia Corinthiensisin his honor. Although an Augustan architectural phase is not attested for the Theater epigraphically, it can be presumed on the basis of recent pottery finds and the large amount of building activity in Corinth during this time.33 Successive phases of construction in the Roman period may be indicated by a number of fragmentary dedications on revetment slabs and architectural blocks from the Corinth Theater. They record building activity and dedications to the following emperors: Claudius, Titus, a son (indeterminate) of Vespasian, Trajan, and Hadrian. The first possible building phase for which epigraphical evidence exists occurred under Claudius in A.D. 42 (P1. :b).34A revetment plaque (PI. 1:d)35and part of a gray marble epistyle block (P1. 1:e)36derive from a rebuilding under the 26. Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, IV, Appendix II, p. 215, no. 14 (Ephesos); pp. 208-209, no. 10 (Patara). 27. Herculaneum:Fuchs 1987, p. 27, nos. B II 1-3;p. 29, no. C II 2. Aphrodisias: Reynolds 1991, pp. 20, 21 (Zoilos). Aspendos: Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, IV,pp. 15-16, 20, 24; Appendix II, p. 233, no. 28. 28. Duncan-Jones1990, pp. 177-184. 29. Williamsand Zervos 1987, p. 19. 30. CorinthVIII, iii, p. 99, no. 231 (I-2224):GR[... ]//HICE(P1. 2:g); p. 100, no. 234 (I-2297): [.praef-fa] BRVM-ANN[nae-cur.] (P1. 2:f).

SIVS//AED-D-S-P-F-D-D-

31. For a list of all inventoried inscriptions that are known

to come from the Theater, see the Appendix. 32. Shear 1926, p. 456.1-2178: CorinthVIII, iii, p. 31, no. 50, 8. pl. 33. Williamsand Zervos1987, p. 5. Kent (CorinthVIII,iii, p. 21) providesa list of 27 dated building dedications at Corinth, 10 of which belong to the Augustan period. 34. Shear 1928b, pp. 476-477; 1-2287:CorinthVIII, iii, p. 40, no. 74, pl. 7. See Williamsand Zervos 1987, pp. 5-6, on problems of chronology of the EarlyRoman phases of the Theater along the southwestbuttressesof the cavea. 35. 1-1555:CorinthVIII,iii, pp. 42-43, no. 84, pl. 9. 36.1-2416, 1-2417:CorinthVIII,iii, p. 43, no. 85, pl. 9.

46

DEDICATIONS

OF ROMAN THEATERS IN THE GREEK EAST

Flavianemperors after the earthquake of A.D.77. A cornice block dated no later than A.D. 101 (P1.l:f) indicates work during the rule of Trajan,possibly the refurbishing of a door in marble.37 In addition, as discussed below, the upper part of a marble revetment of substantialsize records a dedication to the emperor Hadrian (PI. 2:a).38Stillwell also notes two letters on a coping block of the early-3rd-century A.C.arena wall in the Corinth Theater.39Thus, the inscriptions provide a

chronological overviewthat agrees, in general, with the present conception of at least six architectural phases that results from excavation, as outlined above, pp. 3-7. Dedicatory inscriptions from the Hadrianic scaenae frons surviveon architrave-friezeblocks of the scaenae frons. The most prominent dedications occur on the frieze course of the first story. Stillwell published parts of two inscriptions that read CAESAR(P1. 1:g)40and ARI (P1. :h)41

on architrave-friezeblocks of Pentelic marble that have analogous scale and spacing. Stillwell associated the block with ARIwith the order of the portico of the regia, and a third block with METRO(PI. l:i) with the hospitalia.42 He left the block with CAESARunassigned, but given the

similaritywith the others, it can be associated with the second hospitalium.43West published an architrave block from the Theater bearing the inscription CAESAR.44 Neither Stillwell nor Kent refers to this publication, but Stillwell's block with CAESAR seems to be the same as West's block,

as the descriptions are very close. Given the three doors and the different sizes of the surviving blocks and letters, the first architrave-frieze block, with [caes]ARi[.. .], can be restored over the porta regia; the second block, with [. . .]CAESAR[.. .], over the west hospitalium; and the third, with [.. .] METRO [. ..], over the east.45Hence, the inscription over at least one of the doors names

the emperor as the major honorand of the scaenae frons. The inscriptions help clarify the chronology of the 2nd-century A.C. theater. Stillwell called

the elaborate colonnaded marble scaenae frons his second Roman phase, which he dated to the Late Hadrianic to EarlyAntonine period. He based his date largelyon the style of the Corinthian capitalsfrom the porta regia and on one coin of the Hadrianicperiod that he found in a posthole for the aulaea (curtains). One revetment plaque reads CAESARI-H (P1. 2:a), that is, the emperor's

name is in the dative rather than the nominative case, so it appears to indicate a dedication to an emperor whose name begins with H.46Since the Theater bears no known relation to the emperor Honorius, who ruled in the early5th century A.C.,this letter should indicate Hadrian. The inscription makes a Hadrianic date more certain and may preclude the need to maintain a date that extends into the EarlyAntonine period, as Stillwellhad suggested.47 Additional evidence supports dating the scaenae frons to the 120s. First,Hadrian is thought to have visited Corinth in earlyA.D.125 or 126, which maybe when he gave the aqueduct and baths mentioned by Pausanias (2.3.5). The scaenae frons may be connected with the emperor's visit and benefactions, either in anticipation of them or afterwardin thanks. If the town and patrons, and the official building committee, wanted to ready the new theater for a visit in the mid-120s, they would probablyhave started three to five years in advance. Second, the titulatureused here for Hadrian begins with H. This form of his name would suggest that he had by the time of the actual dedication dropped the mention of filiation of Trajanwith Trajan'stitles, which would This titular change appears in A.D. appear as IMP CAESARTRAIANVSHADRIANVSAVGVSTVS.48

123 in his official coinage, where he is referred to as HadrianusAugustus,and may indicate a change in the implications of his political reference to Augustus. Third, the dedication of the statues of Antinous and Dionysos (25, 26) appears to have been separate from the dedication of 37. CorinthII,p. 114, no. 89, figs. 88,89, and p. 136, note 18; 1-2448:CorinthVIII,iii, pp. 44-45, no. 96, pl. 7. 38.1-2372, 1-2373:CorinthVIII,iii, p. 50, no. 105, pl. 10. 39. CorinthII, pp. 84-85, fig. 74. 40. CorinthII, pp. 114, 116, no. 90, fig. 88 (see note 44 below). 41. CorinthII, pp. 114, 116, no. 91, fig. 88. 42. CorinthII, pp. 114, 116, no. 92, fig. 88. 43. CorinthII, pp. 114-116.

44. 1-359/500: CorinthVIII, ii, p. 25, no. 35.

45. METROmaybe associatedwith metropolis, by analogywith two dedicatory inscriptions from the 2nd-centuryA.C. theater at Ephesos which read: 'H flpoTYxoatyieyavo MTl6poroX; T; 'Aoiao;the dedicatory inscriptions from the Corinth Theater are in Latin. 46.1-2372, 1-2373:CorinthVIII,iii, p. 50, no. 105, pl. 10. 47. CorinthII, pp. 75-82, 136. 48. See, e.g., 1-1215and 1-1237 (CorinthVIII, iii, p. 64, no. 137, pl. 12).

THE THEATER AT CORINTH

47

the rest of the sculptural assemblage. The two statues are of Thasian marble rather than the Pentelic that is otherwise used in the sculptures on the facade, and they are also somewhat larger and therefore were possibly in a different location than the sculptures between the columns. A later date is indicated for them because they incorporate proficient use of the running drill, a technique that does not exist in the sculptures on the facade. Since the statues of Antinous and Dionysos would have been made after the death of Antinous in A.D.130, the scaenae frons would have been in place by that time. The names of patrons responsible for building the Theater may also occur in the dedicatory inscriptions.On the block with [.. .]CAESARIH [.. .] the top of the name [m-a]NTON[i]Vs-AN[toni(?) . ..] is preserved (P. 2:a). On another dedication that extended over two or more slabs is the name [ant] ONI-ARISTOCR[atis], which Kent dated to the Hadrianic period (PI. 2:d).49Both dedi-

cations can probablybe associatedwith the Hadrianic scaenae frons because of the similaritiesin material, dimensions, and letter forms. Together with the inscriptions on the first-storyentablature of the scaenae frons, they provide credible evidence for dedication to the emperor and for private benefaction as the source of support for the Hadrianic construction of the Theater. Private patronage of public buildings in Roman Corinth is known to begin in the early 1st century A.C.with donors such as Cn. BabbiusPhilinus, who ordered a round, prefabricatedfountain from Athens. In the 2nd century, Eurykles of Sparta built some baths, Herodes Atticus built

a marble phase of the Odeion (Philostr. VS2.551), and P. Licinius Priscus luventianus erected structures in Corinth's Sanctuary of Poseidon on the Isthmos.50 Architectural patronage in the

Hadrianic theater seems to participate in the traditions of both private building in the Theater and private patronage of other public buildings at Corinth. Other Theater donors named on marble revetment plaques include Primus,son of Publius of the Aemilian tribe, from A.D. 42 (P1. :b).51Some more fragmentaryinscriptions have the names of Gellius(?), possiblyHadrianic;Ti. Cl. Dinippus(?); M. Fulvius,possibly of the Cornelian tribe; and ACRINUS.52 One other tribe also of be the Clustumina.53 The statue base Hicesius to (Pl. 2:g) may be related appears represented, to a donation in the Theater.54A portrait set up in a theater is not necessarily indicative of a benefaction for the theater, because theaters were places where patrons of other buildings could also be recognized, as the donor of the Macellum at Herculaneum or the man who built the aqueduct at Leptis Magna.55 The primary examples of imperial patronage at Corinth are the aqueduct from Stymphalos and the baths that were built by Hadrian (Paus. 2.3.5).56 Revetment slabs provide a large percentage of inscriptions found in the Theater. These slabs were plaques or panels that would have been clipped to brick-faced concrete or to stone blocks, though less likely, by small round metal pins or larger clamps. As we know from a newly reconsti-

tuted slab (PI. 2:d), these plaques were between ca. 0.05 and 0.07 m thick, ca. 1.00 m tall, and the 49. In 1999, Ijoined the blocks1-356and 1-357/1899 (Corinth VIII, iii, pp. 94-95, nos. 221a, b, pl. 19 [Hadrianic]) to 1-2337, 1-2351 (pp. 137-138, no. 346a, pl. 31 [first half of 1st century A.C.]). The height and width of one block is thus preserved: H. slab 0.95-1.00; W. 0.70-0.71 m. On a panel found reused in the Forum Kent reads a similar name, M. Antonius Aristocrates, as well as IMP-CAESARI-H, using the same titulature (1-1906: CorinthVIII, iii, p. 50, no. 106, pl. 10). The Forum panel lists a part of a building, a porticus, and it also derives from a dedica-

tion that is cut across more than one slab, in this case three. Another panel from the Theater contains CLV,like that on the bottom of the slab in question, which Kent has interpreted as the Corinthiantribe Clustumina(1-1845:CorinthVIII, iii, p. 102, no. 242, pl. 22; provenancegiven as unknown,but it is recorded in Stillwell's notebook as the northeast part of the Peristyle Court, where it was used as late paving over a drain [Corinth NB 112, p. 147]). 50. Kent lists 31 inscriptions that denote local benefactions at Corinth (CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 20-23). On the Babbius Monument (I-2147), see CorinthVIII, iii, p. 73, no. 155, pl. 14; Corinth

I, iii, pp. 17-32; and Williams 1993, p. 38. On Priscus struciii, pp. 89, 119-121, nos. 199tures, see IGIV 203; CorinthVIII, 201,306 (1-68/293,1-935,1-1626,1-2194),pls. 17-18,26; Geagan 1989;Jordan 1994, pp. 115-116, note 7; and Sturgeon 1996. Cf. also two inscriptions recording the gift of a macellumat Corinth, in CorinthVIII, ii, pp. 100-103, no. 124; CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 127-128, no. 321, pl. 28; and Williams1993, pp. 39-40. 51. 1-2287:CorinthVIII,iii, p. 40, no. 74, pl. 7. 52. Gellius, 1-2426:CorinthVIII, iii, p. 146, no. 386, pl. 35. iii, p. 147, no. 394, pl. 35. Fulvius, Dinippus, 1-1099:CorinthVIII, 1-250/354: CorinthVIII, ii, p. 117, no. 164. ACRINUS, 1-2173 and

1-2374 (now joined): CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 149-150, nos. 410, 411, pl. 36. 53.1-357/1899: CorinthVIII,iii, pp. 94-95, no. 221b, pl. 19. A second panel preserves CLV(1-1845:CorinthVIII,iii, p. 102, no. 242, pl. 22). 54. 1-2224:CorinthVIII,iii, p. 99, no. 231, pl. 20. 55. Fuchs 1987, pp. 162-163. 56. On Hadrian's patronage of buildings, see Boatwright 2000, pp. 108-143.

48

DEDICATIONS

OF ROMAN THEATERS IN THE GREEK EAST

letters were cut across adjacent slabs that were each ca. 0.70 m wide.57Both the inscriptions and the architecture are veryfragmentary;it is therefore difficult to tell where the revetment plaques would have been located. It seems likely, however, that they were in locations that were not occupied by cut stone architectural blocks or masked by a colonnade. Moreover, the revetment is

flat, so it cannot be restored on curved portions of the building. The areas where some dedicatory revetment was found suggest that the building dedication was set up on the interior of the Theater proper, most likely over the interior entrances to the orchestra (the parodoi or aditus maximi), where it would have been most visible. This is a common location for such dedicatory inscriptions, as, for example, in the theater at Leptis Magna.58 Moreover, the colonnade on the scaenae frons may have continued around onto the side walls,

as in the theater at Bosra in Syria,which would have eliminated the space over the entrances to the stage (versurae) for the placement of the revetment.59 Other revetment plaques of different thickness and possibly differing dates were likely located on the back wall of the scaenae frons, on the walls of the Peristyle Court, and in East Theater Plaza, where they were found.60 Some

parts of the building complex may have had benefactions recorded directly on them, as the cornice block with the dedication to Trajan, already mentioned. Three dedications mention men holding important municipal offices. The best-known in-

scribed dedication in the Theater complex is that of Erastus (PI. 1:c), an aedile from the time of Nero, thought to be thee Erastus of the New Testament, who was a friend of the Apostle Paul (Rom. 16.23; 2 Tim. 4.20).61 Erastus as aedile provided substantial paving, which is now in the

area known as East Theater Plaza. His dedication there is marked by an inscription in the pavement that was once filled in with large bronze letters fixed in place with lead, and covered three slabs of gray Acrocorinthian limestone, of which the left slab is now missing. Since part of the inscription is crossed by a cutting, the inscribed slabs may have been moved from their original location, perhaps at the time the Hadrianic scaenae frons was erected.62 The inscription records Erastus's dedication in exchange for, or as an obligation of, his office. As aedile he was an impor-

tant, annually elected civic official responsible for the maintenance of civic property, the revenue from such properties, and forjudging commercial and financial litigation. The inscription indicates that the benefaction was made for the purpose of self-advancement in his career. Other civic officials are also noted. The aedile Hicesius is recognized in an honorific base, possibly as a donor (PI. 2:g).63The offices of praefectusfabrorumand curatorannonae also appear to be cited on one plaque (PI. 2:f),64 as is a member of the fetial priesthood (PI. 2:h).65 On the evidence of the word Isthmion, Kent restored the office of agonotheteson the revetment slab from the Hadrianic dedication

that contains the name [ant]ONI.ARISTOCR[atis]

(PI. 2:d).66

Given the fragmentary nature of the inscriptions from the Theater, it is not possible to make a conclusive statement about what ranks of officials made dedications, though it can be pointed out that the offices presently known are of minor civic officials. The major officials of municipal government are absent, such as the annual duoviri. No officials of the provincial government appear, and only one priest is represented.67 The picture might have been different if more of 57. 1-356 and I-357/1899 (Corinth VIII, iii, pp. 94-95, nos. 221a, b, pl. 19 [Hadrianic]) joined to 1-2337, 1-2351 (pp. 137138, no. 346a, pl. 31). The pieces in Pls. 2:a (1-2372, 1-2373: CorinthVIII, iii, p. 50, no. 105, pl. 10), 2:b (1-2302/2391: CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 152-153, no. 433, pl. 37; joined to 1-2357: CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 137-138, no. 346d, pl. 31; and 1-2774), 2:c (1-251: CorinthVIII, i, p. 54, no. 71; joined to 1-2294: CorinthVIII, iii, p. 13, no. 41, pl. 5), CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 94and 2:d (1-356/357/1899/2337/2351: 95, no. 221a, b; pp. 137-138, no. 346a) have similar dimensions, letter forms, and findspots within the orchestra to cavea area. 58. Caputo 1987, pp. 24-27, pl. 147. 59. Rossetto and Sartorio 1995, III, pp. 197-198; Finsen 1972. 60.1-510: CorinthVIII,ii, p. 44, no. 61 (P1. 2:h). 1-2289/2290/

2392 + 1-2368/2379/2380/2381/2382/2390: CorinthVIII, iii, iii, p. 100, no. 234 p. 135, no. 336 (P1.2:e). 1-2297:CorinthVIII, (P1. 2:f). 61. 1-2436: CorinthII, p. 4; Shear 1929, pp. 525-526; Corinth

VIII,iii, pp. 99-100, no. 232, pl. 21. 62. I owe the interpretation of the secondary use of the Erastus inscription to C. Williams, via pers. comm. 63. 1-2224: CorinthVIII, iii, p. 99, no. 231, pl. 20. 64. 1-2297: CorinthVIII, iii, p. 100, no. 234, pl. 19. 65. 1-510: CorinthVIII, ii, p. 44, no. 61. 66. 1-357/1899: CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 94-95, no. 221b, pl. 19. 67. See Kent in CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 17-31, on the political institutions of Roman Corinth and the known pattern of building dedications. On the priest, a member of the fetial priesthood, see CorinthVIII, ii, p. 44, no. 61 (1-510).

THE THEATER AT CORINTH

49

the inscriptions survived,for in Rome Scaurusbuilt his theater as curule aedile, Pompey in the year of his second consulship, and Balbus after his triumph when he was proconsul of Africa, while Pulcher erected his in Herculaneum after his triumph and Rufus in Pompeii when duovir for the fourth time. Inscriptions suggest that parts of the Theater complex were funded separately.There are at least two groups of revetment plaques: one with smooth, sawn backs, the other with hammerpicked or split backs. Moreover,at least two parts of the Theater seem named on what appear to have been separate slabs, that is, the ornamentaomnia(P1.2:b)68and the scaena(P1.2:e).69Further, thewithe segments similarities: thickness,

and with CAESARI H[.

[orna]MENTAOM[nia]

. .]70

display a number of

letter forms, tooling on the backs, means of clamping,

letters cut across

two slabs, marble grain and color, and marble veins aligned at a diagonal to the slab. In light of all these similarities, it seems possible to suggest that these two slabs may have formed part of the same two- or three-slab inscription. Despite their fragmentary condition, the surviving texts suggest that parts of the complex were donated separately. The name of a sculptor that is inscribed at the bottom of a dedicatory revetment plaque, OEOAOTOSAOHNAIOZ EITOIEI(P1. 2:c), was obtained by joining two fragments.71 Above the signature are the letters vi, which Meritt restored as [dedica]vi[t]. Architects sign as architectus, but this inscription follows a formula that has long been used by sculptors. This is one of the few sculptor's signatures

at least partially preserved in Corinth, and it helps support the argument

that many marble sculptors, or at least the best known, traveled. The Theodotos inscription is one of two known examples

of a sculptor's

signature

from a scaenae

frons with a sculptural

assemblage, the other being from Side in Pamphilia. Our inscription cannot be dated epigraphically, but there is only one phase of the Corinth Theater known to have a sculptural assemblage, that of the Hadrianic period.72 The significance of the inscriptions from the Corinth Theater is more obvious when the choice of language for the dedication is emphasized. The building dedications are in Latin at a time when such dedications had long been in Greek at Athens. The choice of language is an important element for understanding the sculptural program on the facade. Text is connected to and defines images, and text and image coexist as key symbols on this facade. Corinth was a Roman colony and the provincial capital of Achaea, so it is not surprising that official inscriptions

are in Latin;

but given that Greek increases in use at Corinth during the first half of the 2nd century, the use of Latin here can be seen to underscore the official nature of the building and its dedication.73 The use of Latin is a reminder that the cultural context at Corinth would have differed significantly from that of Athens and other parts of Old Greece when the Hadrianic phase of the Corinth Theater was constructed. The language of the dedications, the plan of the architecture, and the large quantity of sculptures connected with the building would have given a specifically Italian impression to a major civic building in Roman Corinth. What Walbank has suggested for the Early Roman colony may also be true in the period of Hadrian-the commercial and political interests of the Corinthians "required the maintenance and strengthening of links with Rome."74What better way of propitiating Rome than constructing an Italian-style theater, carving dedicatory labels in Latin, and putting a large image of the emperor in the center of the theater facade? 68. 1-2302/2391: CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 152-153, no. 433, pl. 37; nowjoined to 1-2357:CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 137-138, no. 346d, pl. 31; and 1-2774. 69. 1-2289/2290/2392 + 1-2368/2379/2380/2381/2382/ 2390: CorinthVIII,iii, p. 135, no. 336, pl. 30. 70. 1-2372,1-2373:CorinthVIII, iii, p. 50, no. 105, pl. 10. 71.1-251:CorinthVIII, i, p. 54, no. 71;joined to 1-2294:Corinth VIII,iii, p. 13, no. 41, pl. 5. 72. Side: see Mansel 1963, pp. 122-142, for the theater, for the inscription. Signaturesof sculptors who sign as 137, p.

Korinthios(Kopivtog;) are rare; for an instance of one on Delos, see Marcade 1957b, II, no. 24: "Aristophilos son of Eusthenes Korinthios made it (rnov6aev)." 73. Kent (Corinth VIII, iii, pp. 18-19) argued that Greek became common for official inscriptions of the colony during the Hadrianic period, although his figures indicate that a substantial number were in Latin (10 of the 25 texts dated Hadrianic). 74. On the founding of the Roman colony and its early history, see Walbank 1997, esp. p. 107.

4

THE ROLE OF THE ROMAN THEATER

he significance of a complex sculptural assemblage like the one in the Corinth Theater becomes clear when the types of activities and performances that took place there during the first half of the 2nd century A.C. are considered. The activities are of many kinds. Theaters

served as the location for playsand other forms of dramaticentertainment. They played a role in certain types of religious festivals, processions, and ritual, and they provided a meeting place for

political and social functions. The general subjects of the Theater sculptures epitomize the predominant culture and the events that occurred there. PLAYSAND PERFORMANCE Evidence for activitiesin the Roman theater in the time of Hadrian,Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurelius comes from various sources. The Scriptores Historiae Augustae refer to Hadrian's fondness for the theater. He is said to have presented plays of all kinds and to have had court actors appear in public (Hadr. 19.5-6). He is reported to have always furnished, depending upon the occasion,

tragedies, comedies, Atellan farces, playerson the sambuca, readers, or poets (Hadr.26.4). This passage could refer to revivalsof ClassicalGreek dramas,both tragedies and comedies, especially given Hadrian's fondness for Greek studies, which earned him the appellation Graeculusearly in

life (Hadr.1.5). He honored Trajanin the theaterby havingessences of balsamand saffronpoured over the seats (Hadr.19.5). Moreover,at the VillaAdrianaon the Tiber,Hadrian had two theaters constructed: one of Greek plan and the other an odeion.1 According to the same source, Antoninus

Pius also loved the arts of the stage-players(Ant.Pius 11.8). MarcusAurelius, feeling that various types of entertainment were becoming too popular, limited gladiatorialspectacles and also curtailed the amount that could be donated to support theatrical performances, specifying the

number of gold pieces that actors could receive and producers could spend (Marc.11.5). Bieber, Green, and Beacham have summarized the types of Greek and Roman drama written in the Roman period and the evidence for their continued performances throughout the Imperial period.2 It is often difficult to distinguish interest in the dramatic literary tradition from

actual performance, but physical evidence such as masks, paintings, and mosaics, in combination with the writings of Pollux (A.D. 180-192), provide information about characters and costumes. Possible theater tickets from Pompeii and Athens that bear the name of a play or a drama-

tist, such as Aeschylus, may refer to revivals.Lucian, writing in Syriain the third quarter of the 2nd century A.C., provides some contemporary views of Greek drama, attesting to its ongoing popularity. Second-century mosaics depicting masks and other Dionysiac motifs from a room above the Demeter Sanctuaryat Pergamon, according to Green, provide "evidencefor a sophistication in theatre history and practice."The mid-4th-centuryA.c. mosaics from the House of 1. Franceschini 1991, pp. 601-603 (theater), 592-594 (odeion). 2. Bieber 1961a, pp. 227-253; Green 1994, pp. 142-171;

Beacham 1992, pp. 27-153. See also Csapo and Slater 1995, with bibliography; Wallace 1997; Potter 1999; and Bergmann and Kondoleon 1999.

THE ROLE OF THE ROMAN THEATER

52

Menander in Mytilene demonstrate familiarity with 12 plays, even if their actual performance cannot be verified.3 Apuleius (Flor.18), writing in the mid-2nd century A.C., gives some indication as to what types of performers might have appeared in contemporary theater, including mimes, comedians, tragedians, tightrope walkers, magicians, pantomimes, and philosophers.4 Pantomime became a major type of performance on the Roman imperial stage. Subjects of pantomime described by the sources include the love of Ares and Aphrodite, with Helios and Hephaistos; Athamas; Ino; Atreus and Thyestes, Aegisthus, and Aerope; Hektor and Andromache; Agamemnon; Oedipos; Hercules Furens; and the Madness ofAjax, with Odysseus. Apuleius gives an account in his Metamorphoses(10.34-35) of lewd activities in the Corinth Theater of the mid-2nd century A.C.:following a mime enacting the Judgment of Paris, the ass (the main character) was to be forced to copulate onstage with a woman convicted of many crimes.5 Dio Cassius (76.8.2) relates a story told by Septimius Severus of a consul carrying on with a prostitute dressed as a leopardess on stage. Meiggs, following the account in Dio, characterizes the mimes, farces, and pantomimes of the Late Empire as analogous to the immorality of Restoration Drama.6 In his Against ComicMockery,Aelius Aristides, writing in Smyrna in the third quarter of the 2nd century A.C., argues against opposition to contemporary comedy in the theater. The piece thus attests to newly written comedies. About the same time Pseudo(?) Lucian writes two short comedies. In a bequest for the city of Oenoanda of A.D. 127, the dramatic categories specified in-

clude writers of comedies, painters (possibly of scenery), and actors of revived comedy and tragedy. Moreover, Philostratos

the Elder (second half of the 2nd century A.C.) is said to have written

43 tragedies and 14 comedies.7 Given the revivals of old plays and new treatments of old themes in mime and pantomime, it seems likely that numerous subjects would have been portrayed on the Corinth stage. In comparison, the subjects of the sculptures on the Corinth facade and between the columns appear more limited. This smaller range of subjects may result from the restricted space available for statuary and from the impossibility of creating sculptures that were connected to the multiplicity of dramatic themes portrayed. Perhaps because the sculptures were relatively limited in number, they would have functioned symbolically rather than narratively to convey a specific meaning for the city of Corinth regarding its activities and political alliances. RELIGIOUS

FESTIVALS,

PROCESSIONS,

AND RITUAL

Religious festivals, processions, and ritual are major activities involving theaters in the 1st and 2nd centuries A.C. Such activities are not new, having a long history in the celebrations of the Dionysia in Athens and elsewhere in the Classical and Hellenistic periods. Inscriptions from Delos, for example, attest to the purification of the processional route and the skene before the celebration, and others from Priene note sacrifices to Dionysos on the altar in the theater. The importance of leveling the road used for the procession from the agora to the theater is mentioned at Peiraieus and Delos.8 The direction of these processions, from agora to theater, could 3. With many publications on numerous aspects of the ancient theater, the theater of the Roman Imperial period is finallyreceivingattention that is long overdue. See Bieber 1961a, pp. 227-253, figs. 811-816, on theater tickets; Pickard-Cambridge 1988, pp. 270-272, fig. 140; and Green 1994, pp. 142171, with references. On masks, see Cain 1988. Lucian, Somn. 26, Salt.27. On the mosaics at Pergamon:Green 1994, p. 165; Saltzmann 1991, pp. 448-452; at Mytilene:Berczelly 1988. 4.Jory (1986, pp. 147-149, notes 35-37, on the pantomime) emphasizes the link between the theater and the gods from

early developments in Italy as well as the competitive cost of scenic games and religious festivals. 5. For interpretations of Apuleius, see Winkler 1985. 6. Meiggs 1973, pp. 420-425. 7.Jones 1993, with references. Note especially the inscribed catalogues of victors from Thespiae, Tanagra, Orchomenos, and Oropos, and the contests at Aphrodisias under Commodus (pp. 43-47). See alsoJory 1986. 8. Cole 1993, with references.

RELIGIOUS FESTIVALS, PROCESSIONS,

AND RITUAL

53

explain the greater importance of the eastern entrances in the Corinth Theater, an emphasis that may derive from Greek times and the Theater's location west of the supposed agora. The east-west road that led into East Theater Plaza in Roman times may have also been preferred in the Greek period, as it was on a naturallylevel terrace of land. Ancient sources suggest that in the Roman period as well, ritual, spectacle, and performance intersect and culminate in activities that move from the theater entrances into the orchestra and

onto the stage. As was discussed above (pp. 32-33), an inscription from Gytheion contains specifications for the eight-day Kaisareiaand a copy of Tiberius's reply approving it. This text describes a religious procession in which painted images of the imperial family-Augustus, Tiberius, and Livia-are carried into the theater, where they were set up. Thus the images of the imperial family could "watch" the religious procession, the sacrifices to the health of the imperial family, and the dramatic performances and contests that subsequently took place. Since the images at

Gytheion were in the form of paintings, they could be carried and thereby be directlyinvolved in the procession. In contrast, the imperial group on the Corinth Theater facade is marble, station-

ary,and therefore not part of a procession, but its suggested location on the facade would give it the appearance of a viewer, thus recalling one function of the painted images at Gytheion.9 Related to this issue is the mention by Dio Cassius(73.31.1) of images of deities in the theater;he refers to statues of the deceased Faustinathe Younger that MarcusAurelius ordered carried into the theater, where all could see her and she could "watch"the performances.10 Indeed, the small

bust of Antoninus Pius(?) (73) may have been carried in such a procession into the Corinth Theater complex. Two festivals that are relatively close in date to Corinth's Hadrianic theater exemplify reli-

gious practices involving a theater. At Ephesos, a major donation made in A.D. 103/4 by Vibius Salutarisis recorded in an inscription 568 lines long and nearly five meters in length, prominently inscribed on the east wall of the south parodos. The bequest establishes a new civic ritual including religious processions from the Temple of Artemis to the theater and back, in which gold and ivory statuettes of the goddess, the reigning emperor, and various personifications are carried. At Oenoanda in Lycia, festivals endowed in A.D. 124 by the citizen Demosthenes are recorded on an inscribed stele, which was set up with his statue in the food market. In the in-

scription, the kinds of events provided for by the endowment, which may be typicalfor the Greek East in this period, are enumerated in some detail. The events comprise contests for trumpeters,

heralds, writers of encomia in prose and poetry, flute players,and tragic and comic actors. The benefaction also includes provisions to hire mimes and performers and to fund spectacles or displays. In addition, the stele records a procession that went through the theater complex bearing imperial images, an altar, and sacrificial animals, before returning to the temple for sacrifice. A similarly diverse array of activities can probably be imagined as taking place in the Theater at Corinth." The celebration of victories in a theater is a Greek tradition that continued into Roman times. Such victories are recorded in a few monuments found in the Corinth Theater, among which is

the base for a bronze statue of Vibius (71), the nine-time victor in the singing contests at Argos, Corinth, Sikyon,and Epidauros.This Ist-centurymonument, which was set up byVibius'sfather, is analogous to the grave stele found at Isthmia of the Corinthianflute-playerKornelios,who was also a winner of many contests and whose two sons set up a funerary stele in his honor. Kornelios is depicted holding his flutes and round objects that may represent prizes.12 9. SEGXI 923. Rose 1997a, pp. 142-144, no. 74; Price 1984,

pp. 103, 106, 109, 111, 188, 210-211. Cf. also Fishwick1991, pp. 1,518-525, 550-566. 10. I owe this reference to G. Termini. 11. Ephesos: Mitchell 1990; Rogers 1991. Oenoanda: W6rrle 1988. Corinth: Geagan 1968; Biers and Geagan 1970; cf. also

Gebhard 1996. 12. Lattimore (Isthmia VI, no. 87) dates the stele to the mid-2nd century A.C. Cf. the equally large stele from Isthmia with inscribed victory wreaths (Clement 1972, p. 167, pl. 141:c, IS 69-2.

54

THE ROLE OF THE ROMAN THEATER

Another victor's monument from Corinth, probably from the 2nd century A.C.,is indicated by several fragments from its top (72). On it are depictions of open wicker baskets, of the sort illustrated with victory palms on a grave stele from Mytilene and on reliefs at Side and Hierapolis.13 On the Corinth monument, which once contained nine baskets, victories at Pergamon and Nikomedeia are recorded.14 These two victor's monuments probably represent a small portion of the victory statues and stelai that would once have been set up in the Corinth Theater. THE POLITICAL AND SOCIAL ROLE OF THE ROMAN THEATER The theater, primarily a place for dramatic performances, had already played a role as a place for political and social activities in the Greek period. For example, in Classical Athens, citizens and foreigners honored by the Boule and Ekklesiawere proclaimed publicly in the theater.15Ekklesia sometimes met in theaters, and at Syracuse, the theater was used exclusively by the Ekklesia of the Demos.16 It was at a public gathering in the theater at Aegae, during the wedding celebrations of his daughter Cleopatra, that Philip II of Macedon was killed (Diod. Sic. 16.92-94). Two sources refer to the Greek theater at Corinth. Plutarch records Aratus's address to the Corinthians in the Theater in 243/2 B.C., informing them that they are free from the Macedonians (Arat. 1.17.23); and Polybius (5.25) tells us that Philip V called a meeting of the Macedonians in the Corinth Theater in 218 B.C. In Italy of the Republican period, activities in the theater also become entangled with politics. In discussing the theater of the 2nd century B.C., Erich Gruen defines it as a "locus for national observances and an advertisement of public values." He sees the retention of the old system of impermanent theaters as a means for the Senate to reaffirm control of public entertainment and to shape the direction of popular culture.17 In many ways, the Romans took care from the beginning to promote the primacy of their interests and to subordinate Hellenism to Rome's national goals.18 In the Corinth Theater, Rome's control is emphasized by the use of Latin in the official inscription, by the primary location and scale assigned to the imperial portraits, and by the subordination of Greek subjects to them in size and position. Cicero (Sest. 118-123) reports that actors sometimes emphasized lines that were relevant to the present political climate. In one of his letters to Atticus (Att. 14.3.2), he asks for news about demonstrations in the theater after Caesar's assassination. After permanent theaters are built in Rome, however, such as the theaters of Balbus and Marcellus, almost nothing is known about what went on in them.19 The building complex of the Theater of Pompey in Rome included a Curia, which is well known as the site of Caesar's assassination in 44 B.C. Sometime in the mid- to late 1st century A.C., Apollonios of Tyana refused to attend a meeting of the Ekklesia in the Theater of Dionysos in Athens because of the gore from the arena activities there (Philostr. VA 4.22).20 Attendance at games held in the theater was of political and social importance, and the seating was organized according to status. Senators had separate entrances and seating from the knights and the crowd. Tribunaliawere reserved for magistrates, and subsellia,or low benches, for senators and tribunes. Hence, the theater was a place for the display of public status.21 13. Mytilene:Pfuhl-M6bius,I, p. 248, no. 971, pl. 25. IGXII 2 388. Side:Weiss1981. Hierapolis,theater dated A.D. 205-210: HierapolisI, pp. 59, 60, 62, pls. l:b, 2:a, for relief over porta regia;pp. 75-76, pl. 7:a, for orchestrarelief; pp. 80-82, pl. 7:b, for coffer, with bibliographyand date; pp. 93-94, pl. 9:b. 14. Corinthianfestivalsand victorlistsare discussedby Meritt (CorinthVII,i, pp. 14-25, 28-29, nos. 14-16, 19); West (Corinth iii, see Index III:B, VIII,ii, pp. 63-66, no. 81); Kent (CorinthVIII, under AthleticEvents;Festivals;ImperialContests;ThymelicContests);

and in Biers and Geagan 1970 and Spawforth1994. 15. Cole 1993; the controversy over honoring citizens is

mentioned by Aeschines (2.11.32, 36-37) and Demosthenes (18.121). On the theater as a political meeting place, see McDonald 1943, pp. 56-61; Kolb 1981, pp. 92-96; Reden 1995, pp. 147-148; and Dominguez 1996, pp. 57-62. 16. On the Syracusetheater,see Polacco and Anti 1981, pp. 41-43. 17. Gruen 1992, pp. 221-222. 18. Gruen 1992, p. 270. 19. Richardson 1992, pp. 381-383. 20. Welch 1999, pp. 130-131. 21. Rawson 1987; Moore 1995; Parker1999.

THE POLITICAL AND SOCIAL ROLE OF THE ROMAN THEATER

55

Sculptural dedications occur in theaters throughout the Roman world. Imperial portraits were set up at the base of scaenae frontes, in rooms or courtyards adjacent to theaters, and on theater facades. In the Theater of Dionysos in Athens, for example, 12 statues of Hadrian were set up, one for each tribe of the city, and a thirteenth was added to represent a new tribe.22In the theater at Leptis Magna, a seated statue of Sabina in the guise of Ceres-Venus looks down over the audience from the summa cavea.23Public portraits of nonimperial subjects, including statues of athletes, also occur in many theaters.24 Imperial power as well as the authority of local governors and officials is invoked through sculptural assemblages.25 The political aspect of the Roman theater at Corinth is most forcefully conveyed by the imperial portraits in the niches of the facade. The emperor, as the largest figure, is the most important figure on the facade. He is also the focal point of the niche composition. His image functions as a symbol of the emperor's control and, by extension, of Roman imperium.The niche figures face the spectator directly and therefore they act as static icons. They are set in the context of mythological narratives, which are taken from Greek art but are employed hereto symbolize Roman concepts of victoria and virtus and to indicate that Roman culture has assimilated elements of Greek culture. The message of the mythological reliefs is straightforward and easy for the viewer to understand. The reliefs are set up in close proximity to the emperor, in a sense recalling the way that Victoria and Virtus crown the emperor on the Great Trajanic frieze in Rome.26 The formulation of this message overshadows the significance of individual sculptures on the facade. The emperor is shown in a context that is unrealistic-the scaenae frons is a facade with no building behind and the emperor never actually sits in its central niche-but one that may have been intended to recall an architectural form that is familiar and real: a tripartite honorary arch. The tripartite honorary arch is known in Rome from the time of the Parthian Arch of Augustus (19 B.C.), a pseudo-triple-bay arch, which is followed by the freestanding tripartite Arch of Tiberius at Orange (A.D. 20-26).27 A triple arch on a facade that contains imperial portraits functions as a hieroglyph of triumph. Conceptually, a theater facade that is decorated in the manner of the Corinth Theater brings the full historical weight of the emperor's office into constant view for the audience. To see the emperor in this context is to comprehend that he is the most powerful figure in the empire. 22. Geagan 1979, pp. 389-392. 23. Caputo and Traversari1976, pp. 89-91, no. 68, pls. 6770. 24. Fora discussionof portraitsin westerntheaters,see Fuchs 1987, pp. 162-165, 166-185. For statues of athletes, see, e.g., Erim and Smith 1991, pp. 84-86 (boxers). 25. On dedicationsto emperorsin easterntheaters,see Rumschied 2000, p. 45.

26. On the Great Trajanicfrieze, see, e.g., Koeppel 1982a and Leander Touati 1987. 27. On the arch and the fornix, see Richardson 1992, pp. 22-23. ParthianArch of Augustus in Rome: Kleiner 1985, pp. 11-13, 25-28. Arch at Orange: Kleiner 1985, pp. 47-48. Cf. also the Arcusad Isis on the relief of the Haterii: Brilliant 1967, fig. 7. On the uses of statussymbolsin antiquity,see, e.g., Reinhold 1969.

5

CONCLUSIONS THE SCULPTURAL ASSEMBLAGE OF THE CORINTH THEATER

T he configuration

of the architecture of the Hadrianic phase of the Corinth Theater provides the setting for a complex group of sculptures. The architectural format resembles that found in many theaters in the West. The so-called western plan has three large semicircular niches that support aediculae on a three-story scaenae frons. The aediculae provide the setting for over life-size sculptures in the second and third stories. Restored in the Corinth aediculae is an imperial group consisting of the reigning emperor Hadrian, and Trajan, Augustus, and Livia, who provide a legitimizing support for the Hadrianic regime. The imperial "family"is set in the context of statuary representing the cultural heritage that the Greeks and Romans shared: Greek mythological battles, deities, athletic events, and education. THE IMPERIAL FAMILY GROUP Imperial statues were set up in theaters for a reason: in most cases the emperor could not attend major events. This was particularly true in Italy outside of Rome and in the provinces. Placement of an imperial family group on the scaenae frons meant that the spectator would always be aware of the emperor, as if he were actually present. The multistoried scaenae frons provides a format in which the emperor can be viewed by his subjects. The elevated position of the emperor gives the impression that he is presiding over the ceremonies and activities below, and thus recalls the high platforms or tribunals on which the emperor would sit at a ceremonial function. The overall effect is a celebration of the emperor. Through its hierarchic, frontal position, his image is an icon of imperial power and authority. The presentation of an imperial family group as the largest element on the facade is a potent element of political propaganda, for the statuary group was a constant reminder of the ultimate power and control of Rome.l Imperial family groups are found throughout the empire in the 1st century A.C.; some are located in courtyards attached to theaters. In eastern Roman theaters that have a straight facade, an imperial family group may stand between the columns or be represented in reliefs over the central door, as at Hierapolis. In some theaters there was only the image of the emperor, placed in a central niche. It is not until the late 1st and early 2nd century A.C. and the development of the western plan with three large niches that an imperial family group can be positioned in large niches on a scaenae frons. Corinth provides the first well-preserved example of this arrangement. The niche figures at Corinth may celebrate the virtus of the emperor and the magnificentiaof his house and his reign. Trajan and Augustus are included, rather than Hadrian's wife Sabina, for example, as they legitimate Hadrian's regime. The presence of the imperial group may help 1. On the role of images in the Roman world, see Elsner 1998. The significance of the imperial image is clearly stated by Severian of Gabala, On the Creationof the World5.5 (ca. A.D. 400): "Since an emperor cannot be present to all persons, it is necessary to set up the statue of the emperor in law courts, market

places, public assemblies, and theaters. In every place, in fact, in which an official acts, the imperial effigy must be present, so that the emperor may thus confirm what takes place. For the emperor is only a human being, and he cannot be present everywhere" (trans. Elsner [1998, p. 54]).

58

CONCLUSIONS

remind the viewer of Corinth's important position in the Roman governmental structure as the provincial capital of Achaia. The use of Latin for the Theater's building dedications underscores the continuing Romanitas of the colony, a concept that is already promoted by the imperial family group. As witnessed here, in the Hadrianic period Latin remains Corinth's official language and the language of her political and religious institutions. Some of the fragmentary inscriptions indicate that the Theater is dedicated to the emperor Hadrian. Others show that the Theater was paid for by local patrons and that they may have supported different segments of the architectural complex. The patrons of the Theater appear to have been members of the wealthy local elite. The inscribed records of their gifts suggest that they were proud of the important offices they held and the financial responsibilities that accrued to them as officeholders. Their dedications may help express gratitude to the emperor for his recent beneficence or propitiate him for future support for the city.2Their benefactions form part of a long-established custom of euergetism and reciprocity at Corinth and throughout the Roman world.3 THE SCULPTURAL PROGRAM The Theater facade would have been seen from a distance, and the sculptures would have been read collectively, in segments, and with multivalent significance. In the proposed reconstruction, the compositions of the facade can be read both horizontally and vertically. In the first story, statues of divinities stand above battle reliefs in which the gods triumph; in the second, Trajan's posthumous image is accented by reliefs showing defeat of the eastern Amazons, the myth forming an analogy to his Parthian campaigns. Moreover, the most important element is the largest and is placed directly in the center, using an easily understood, didactic pictorial language found on other monuments.4 The reigning emperor Hadrian is set in the middle of the third story, wearing a cuirass and flanked by reliefs showing the Labors of Herakles. Herakles, whose cult is popular with Roman merchants and who provides a supreme model for military excellence, appears to be intended as a comparison for the emperor as a triumphing hero and future divus.5Indeed, the emphasis on Herakles is striking for a city whose economy seems largely based on mercantile activities. The image of Hadrian is also flanked by two silenoi on piers. This location for Hadrian mimics Dionysos's position in the Karystios Monument on Delos, which itself was possibly modeled on a 4th-century B.C.Athenian choregic monument overlooking the Theater of Dionysos. At Corinth, Hadrian could in one sense be viewed as Neos Dionysos. The possible reflection of a 4th-century choregic monument appears related to the construction of the scaenae frons as a form of civic patronage.6 Moreover, Helios, who plays a role in apotheosis, appropriately looks out from a pediment above Hadrian and Trajan. Corinth's important deities provide the contemporary context and establish a link to the Greek cultural background of the Roman colony, using Greek cults that are important at Corinth in Roman times. Some local cult subjects are represented by their traditional adjuncts, as Dionysos and Aphrodite, and others appear as pedimental busts, as Helios, Demeter, and Poseidon, whose Corinthian cults were practiced on the heights of Acrocorinth, on its north slope, and at Isthmia. Political figures on the scaenae frons correspond to political portraits in the cavea, and sculptures on the architecture refer to Corinthian cults and symbolize culture, drama, and education. 2. According to Pausanias (2.3.5), Hadrian built baths at Corinth and an aqueduct to Corinth from Stymphalos. 3. See, e.g., CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 20-23; and Reden 1995, pp. 97-98, 147-148. 4. Cf. silver missorium of Theodosius I in Madrid, Academia de la Historia: Bianchi Bandinelli 1971, pp. 357-359, 437, pl.

338 (A.D. 387-388); Kiilerich 1993, pp. 19-26. 5. Cf.Jaczynowska 1981, pp. 658-660; OCD3,p. 688, s.v. Hercules (Rose, Scheid). 6. On the proclamation of Hadrian as the new Dionysos, see Perret 1929, p. 31, note 1; SEG XLVII 222; Despinis 2003, p. 134, notes 348-350.

THE SCULPTURAL PROGRAM

59

Some deities and mythological figures may be related to dramaticperformances, especially to the mimes and pantomimes popular in the 2nd century A.C., as well as to the revivalsof Classical tragedies and comedies favored by Hadrian.7The catalogue of the Caesareaheld at Corinth in A.D.127 mentions writers of comedies, comoedoi,tragoedoi,and painters. This catalogue is interpreted as referring to the staging of revived comedies, tragedies, and newly written comedies, but not of new tragedies.8 Statues that pertain to athletics and education, for example, the Monte-

verde youth (19), the Doryphoros (20), the Herakles herm (22), and Chiron (23), call to mind important cultural institutions such as athletic contests, the gymnasium, and education. The interest in Classical subjects and styles in the Theater sculptures reflects the heightened taste for

Classicalart under Hadrian, as well as the pervasiveinterest in Greek literature and history during the Second Sophistic.9

The imperial family group in the niches of the scaenae frons is framed by mythological reliefs that are attached to the podia on each of the three stories of the facade-Gigantomachy, Amazonomachy, and Labors of Herakles. These reliefs put the emperor in the context of Classical Greece and denote the assimilation of Greek culture by the Romans. The reliefs display

subjects and styles drawnfrom the sculptural repertoire of ClassicalGreece, but their meanings vary and multiply in this Roman setting. The mythological battle scenes establish a theme of triumph over superhuman odds. In a general sense, the losing opponents represent the forces of chaos and political disarray over which the Roman empire has imposed order. The Amazons

likely refer to barbarians, easterners, and foreigners of various types, whom the emperor defeated, much as they had alluded to the Persians during the 5th century B.C.The gods as victors

are likened to the Romans, as if to give them their alliance and support.10Herakles occupies the highest location, having risen to the realm of the gods as a result of his individual battles. Here, he forms an important Roman exemplum virtutis,one who is also particularlyPeloponnesian, and an example to whom the common man can relate. In contrast to the arrangement at Corinth, other theaters that have reliefs adopt a continuous

format. Moreover,many reliefs associated with theaters depict the lives of deities important to the city, as in the Theater of Dionysos in Athens.1" The life of Dionysos is also portrayed on theater reliefs in Asia Minor at Side, Perge, and Nysa, while at Hierapolis, the locally important Apollo and Artemis are featured at the base of the scaenae frons and Dionysos appears at a higher level.12At Corinth, however, the subjects of the mythological reliefs appear to have been selected because they show victories in battles and triumphs over difficult odds. These mythical

representations may have been intended as a metaphor for recent militaryvictories and to evoke general ideas of military triumph and manly courage. Likewise, myth is thought to have been used in ClassicalGreece as an analog for recent historical events.13In the Roman period, reliefs with the Amazonomachy, the Gigantomachy,boar hunts, and the Labors of Herakles appear to have been employed on Roman sarcophagi as a way of extolling a man's courageous military acts.14Some mythological battle sarcophagi of the Antonine period may even have served as the burial place for militarymen.15 7. The specific plays are not specified (SHA Hadr.19.5-6, 26.4). On the epigraphical evidence for revivalsand performances of new plays in the 2nd century A.C., see Jones 1993, pp. 43-48. 8. Geagan 1968; Biers and Geagan 1970, p. 83;Jones 1993, p. 46. 9. On the Second Sophistic, see Anderson 1993 and Elsner 1998. 10. See Castriota1992, pp. 134-152. 11. Sturgeon 1977; for the addition of a head to these reliefs, see Despini 1988. For a detailed study of the reliefs, see now Despinis 2003, pp. 79-91, 120-121, 141-144. 12. Side: Mansel 1963, pp. 134-138, figs. 116, 117; Bernardi

Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 140-141. Perge: Inan et al. 2000. Nysa: Lindner 1994, pp. 109-200. Hierapolis: Winter 1898; HierapolisII; Chuvin 1987, pp. 103-107. 13. For a detailed discussion, see Castriota1992, esp. pp. 134-183. 14. On mythicbattleand Heraklessarcophagi,see, e.g., Koch and Sichtermann 1982; Kleiner 1992, pp. 257-259, 304-306. For Gigantomachysarcophagiof the 2nd centuryA.c., see LIMC IV,p. 243, nos. 501-503, s.v. Gigantes(Vian). On the hunt as a metaphor for battles, as a celebration of virtus,and for its use in Hadrianic triumphalart, see Koortbojian1995, pp. 32-34. 15. Kleiner 1992, p. 305.

CONCLUSIONS

60

Other theaters appear to celebrate victories or show figures and elements with theatrical affinities in more explicit terms. In the theater at Aphrodisias, for example, three pairs of Nikai are thought to refer to Augustus's victory at Actium.16 In the odeion in Thessaloniki, muses of the

Severan period remind the viewer of sources of inspiration for theatrical performances.17Addi-

tionally, hunting or gladiatorial events are depicted in reliefs in the theater at Miletos, and at Corinth there are hunting scenes as well, painted on the arena wall of the early 3rd century A.C.18 In summary, the subjects in the sculptural assemblage at Corinth do not represent the only choices

available,but appear to have been selected for their particularrelevance to the Latin colony at Corinth in Hadrianic times, with the subjects of the mythological reliefs highlighting the pervasive classicism of the era.19 The articulate decoration of the Hadrianic Corinth Theater facade was a vehicle for the selfpresentation of Corinth as a Roman city, a Latin colony, and the prosperous capital of Achaia. The selection of subjects and their location are deliberate, with the sculptures thematically interrelated vertically and horizontally. The sculptural program celebrates the virtus of reigning and past emperors, while also emphasizing the importance of military triumphs and the hereditary right to rule. The sculptural assemblage on the facade exhibits explicit flattery of the emperor and is a gesture of considerable expenditure on themes appropriate to the recipient, themes that could be viewed in some ways as particularly Roman despite being overtly Greek.20 Other 2nd-century

A.C. monuments

from the Roman East similarly combine

Greek and Roman sym-

bols on architectural facades. These include the Philopappos Monument in Athens of A.D. 114116, the Library of Celsus in Ephesos from ca. A.D. 117-120, and the Nymphaeum of Herodes Atticus at Olympia, built in the early 150s A.c.21 As on the Corinth Theater, the sculptures on these multistoried facades can be read along both vertical and horizontal axes. As with many cities of the eastern Roman Empire, the ornate display of sculpture and architecture in the Corinth Theater complex constituted merely a part of the civic landscape, which was richly endowed with marble colonnaded architecture and sculptural displays of many kinds.22 We wish we knew more about the people who inhabited this landscape, but much of what they once left behind them has long been obliterated by subsequent habitation, earthquakes, and invasions. It remains for us to make as much sense as possible of the fragmentary material remains and from them to piece together a model of their important cultural symbols.

In the Hadrianic theater at Corinth the ornate display of sculpture and architecture makes a bold statement about imperial power. The sculptural program promotes the idea of Corinth as a wealthy Roman city in which Roman political and civic institutions are integrated with elements of Classical Greek culture. The size and elaboration of the Theater architecture and the amount of its sculptural decoration project the image of Corinth as an important political and cultural center. The sculptures and inscribed dedications, images and texts, function as symbols that can be read singly, in segments, and as a whole. As one of the most important places in the city for and foreigner alike-to gather, the Theater provided an excellarge groups of people-citizen lent place for such propagandistic statements and for the display of substantial public benefactions. 16. Erim and Smith 1991, pp. 74-79. 17. Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1990; Thessaloniki I, pp. 123-126, nos. 93-96. 18. Altenhofer and Bol 1989. 19. The question of Romanization, as it is usually applied to areas of the Greek East, is not particularly apt for Corinth. In Corinth's 2nd-century theater facade, we see the effect of Hadrianic classicism on a Roman colony in the Greek East, not the results of Romanization on a Greek city. On discourse about

Romanization,see Alcock 1997, with bibliography. 20. See the discussion of these issues for the EarlyImperial period by MacMullen (2000, pp. 1-29, esp. p. 23). 21. Athens:Kleiner 1983. Ephesos:EphesosV,i; Elsner 1998, p. 122, fig. 81, for the restored facade. Olympia:Bol 1984. On statuaryof the 2nd century,see Smith 1998, pp. 70-77. 22. For detailed analysis of the civic and provincial landscapes of Roman Greece, see Alcock 1993, pp. 93-171.

6

ARCHITECTURAL SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

he sculptures attached to the facade consist of four freestanding sculptures in the aediculae, a relief of heraldic griffins on the podium of the central aedicula, three busts of deities in pediments, two high-relief heads on the podia of the side aediculae, and two Silenos pier figures. The imperial group in the niches, the largest of the facade sculptures, attracts principal attention and is presented first below. The griffin relief, which appears to complement the imperial portraits in the central niches, is introduced next. The pediments of the upper two stories follow, then the high-relief heads located on podia of the second-story niches, and finally the two Silenos piers, which are tentatively placed in the third story. IMPERIAL PORTRAITS IN THE NICHES (1-4) Four imperial portraits (1-4) are set into the aediculae of the scaenae frons. The portrait of Trajan (1), discussed first, is the largest, and its identification is the most certain. The possible identification of the mantle state (2) as Augustus and the draped female figure (3) as Livia relies in part on the identification of the other two niche figures and in part on their find locations and the use of certain figural types. Hadrian (?) (4), discussed last, is identified on the grounds of size, findspot, and restored location in the highest level of the aediculae. 1

Portrait of Trajan

Pls. 3-6

Pls. 3-5:a, 6:a 1A Head S-364/3660/3700/unnumbered fragment. The central fragment of the face places the head in the Theater, the left side of the crown in the center of the stage building. S-364, left crown: 1902-1903, tr.34a or b, center of stage building. S-3660, right side: Museum marble pile. S-3700, face: Old Museum marble pile; identified as coming from the Theater by association with drawing in 1928 Corinth NB 321, p. 644. Unnumbered fragment, top of crown: from Shear's excavations. Joined 1985. P.H. crown to top of neck 0.332, W. above ears 0.264, max. Th. 0.256, p.L. face 0.140, W. face at center ears 0.210, W. neck at break 0.173, Th. lower break 0.215 m. Four joining fragments, presenting head from base of eyes to neck; broken through the base of the eyes and nose, across to the right ear, and through the chin and neck; missing a large segment of the center of the crown from front to back. Outer surface of nose, lips, chin, and ears chipped. Bibliography: S-364: de Grazia 1973, p. 236, no. 61, where dated 5th century A.C. (?) and the fleshiness of the ear is noted. Sturgeon 1989, pp. 116-117, figs. 4, 5, pl. 44.

1B

Left hand P1. 6:b, c S-3754. Museum basement marble pile. Written in pencil on piece: "April 30, Cent. T III, XVII or XVIII. Orch," which probably indicates Theater, orchestra, central tr. III, XVII, or XVIII; tr. XVIII, probably 1926. P.L. 0.196, p.W. hand 0.110, W. wrist 0.084 m. Left hand; broken at base of the thumb and first two fingers, through knuckles of third and fourth fingers, and through the base of a held object. Drapery heavily worn, chipped. IA-B: Marble, white, fine to medium grained, micaceous; Pentelic. A fragmentary portrait of a man about two times life-size is represented by these two fragments. His hair is arranged in long, S-shaped locks, which are rather dry and linear in treatment, brushed forward from the back of the crown. The figure is beardless and has no sideburns. The front locks, which divide over the left temple, are carved with a flat chisel in a series of angular planes; locks surrounding the head beginning behind the ear (see P1. 4:b) are worked in higher relief with a round-ended chisel; on the upper back the locks are crisply worked in very low relief with a flat chisel, the edge of which has

62

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

created sharp incisions; the locks form a starlike pattern around a central point. In back the hairline reaches to the middle of the neck. The inner corner of the left eye is articulated by a wide (0.002 m), downward-pointing drillhole, which is carved on the side plane of the nose. The inner corner is similar to the eye of Corinth S-72-22, a fragmentary head of Trajan, except for its position on the nose.1 The tear duct is raised and sharply separated from the eyeball, little of which is preserved. The lower lid is thickened and turned out, forming a flat shelf. Sharp creases extending diagonally outward from the inner corners of the eyes, along with thick vertical folds running down from the nose, and two shallower, vertical grooves in each cheek convey a sense of age and weariness. The lips are slightly parted, the narrow gap between them (W. 0.003 m) separated by two sharply chiseled lines. Although much of the mouth is missing, it is evident that the lower lip is thin, turned out in the center, and emphatically set off from the heavy chin. The upper lip was longer and somewhat wider. The nose was long, judging from the preserved outline. The ears are large, fleshy, and only slightly undercut in back. The proportions of chin and neck are thick. Short, light rasp strokes remain over most facial surfaces. This head shows signs of recutting after its initial carving, possibly because of a change in conception before the statue's dedication or as part of its reuse. The threequarter and rear views (Pls. 5:a, 6:a) give the clearest indication of this recutting. There is evidence of recutting, first, at the nape, where two projections remain as if from a fillet; raised bands do not continue from these to the front. The projecting "fillet" is too wide to have acted as a measuring boss, but instead seems to survive from a wreath. Second, indications of an outline that resembles a wreath can be seen on both sides of the back of the head, where two sets of tool marks occur (see P1. 4:b). A flat chisel was used to carve the hair around the face and on the upper crown, and a round-ended chisel was used for the band of hair that lies behind the forehead hair. The rear border provides a clear indication of the change in tool marks, because it has not been smoothed over. The forward boundary of the change in technique has been worked more smoothly than the rear, creating a continuous pattern of strands from the forehead to midcrown. Thus, carving with the round-ended chisel is secondary and, together with the remains of the fillet, it suggests that the head once wore a wreath. Third, the ears were also recut, as is clear behind the left ear. A line extending behind the lobe seems to indi-

cate the position of a wedge that supported the projecting ear, in the manner of Corinth S-1065, "Gaius"Caesar (P1.5:b).2The size of the wedge may imply that the ear was once larger and projected farther from the side of the head. The ear was shaped carefullywith a small drill, and the interior of the ear is smoothly finished. The recutting may have occurred when the wreath was removed,for the location of the round-endedchisel work abuts the left ear directly. Much of the original shape and tooling of the lower hair,which ends at the nape, also survives.The recutting continues behind the earswhere a drove has eliminated traces of former work. Below the fillet is a wide, undetailed area above a sketchily rendered fringe. The back of the head of Corinth S-1065shows a comparable treatment of the hair at the nape and a similar smooth areajust above it (P1.5:b). In both instances, this probably results from the process of blocking out the cap of hair, forming a kind of template before carving the details. That this practice does not indicate the period of manufactureis shown by investigationof variousdegrees of finish in the hair of sculptures from the Temple of Zeus at Olympia.As with many examples there, the hair at the nape of the Corinth figures represents an early stage of work.3 As previouslymentioned, the working of the crown is distinct from that of the front hair.On the crown,flamelike locks are finely carvedwith a flat chisel in a whirligig patternthat slightlyincreasesin volume towardthe front. The locks are in such low relief that they almost appear etched, as if in a "bronze style"of marble carving. The pattern of the locks is reminiscent of the Doryphoros and of portraitsof Augustus, but comparison with various heads associated with Polykleitos shows that the crown hair of those heads has more volume than is exhibited here.4The low-reliefetching style set in contrast with more deeply worked hair about the face, as seen here, finds good parallelsin portraitsof Trajan.5 The hand (1B) was attached to the arm just above the wrist by a round dowel (diam. 0.015, L. 0.055 m). The mantle crossing the wrist would have masked the join. The hand is partly open, as if it held a flat object between the thumb and last two fingers. The first two fingers extend straight from the palm, perhaps to balance the object held. Thejoining surfacesoccur on three adjacent planes, which would have been inserted into a prepared cutting on the statue. Most of the joining surfaces are tooled with a point, while the area abutting the thumb has flat-chiselmarks.Marksfrom a hammer indicate that the hand was intentionally broken from the statue.

1. Ridgway 1981b, p. 435; Sturgeon 1989, p. 115, fig. 1, pl.

the London Westmacottathlete, the Dresden Diadoumenos, the Rome Conservatori Museums Amazon head of Sosikles type). 5. See Fittschenand Zanker1985, no. 42, Trajanin the Decennial type of A.D. 108, on which the crown hair is verysharply cut. Cf.also AgoraI, pp. 27-28, no. 17 (S-347),pl. 12, a wreathed head of Trajanin the AthenianAgora,somewhatsimilar,though softer and thicker; for identification as Trajan,see Harrison 1960a, fig. 11, caption, and Riccardi 2000, pp. 124-125, figs. 21, 22.

43. 2. S-1065: CorinthIX, no. 135; de Grazia 1973, pp. 93-102, no. 11. 3. See Rehak 1998. 4. Cf. Kreikenbom 1990, nos. III 42 (Apollonios herm), III 43 (Naples), pls. 175, 176; Meyer 1995, figs. 6:23-27 (bronze herm of Apollonios), 6:42-45 (Barracco Doryphoros head and cast in Munich); and Bol 1998, pl. 144:a, c-f (the tops of heads of the bronze herm of the Doryphoros, the Rome Herakles,

IMPERIAL PORTRAITS IN THE NICHES Heavy crosswise rasping marks the back of the hand, which would probably not have been visible. In contrast, the outer surfaces of the fingers are smoothed, most of the rasping eliminated, indicating that they faced forward, perhaps hanging down over the knee. The sharp teeth of the rasp (or scraper) are widely set, up to 0.002

63

m apart.This tooling is similarto the wide, deep cuts on the folds beside the nose on the head (1A), and also to the rasping around relief figures on lappets of portraits of Hadrianfrom the Corinth Odeion (S-1456) and from the Corinth Forum (S-1872).6 Hadrianic.

This head and left hand are associated because of similar scale and marble, and proximate findspots in the central stage to cavea area. Little remains to indicate the pose. The left hand was made separately, with drapery crossing the wrist. The position of the drapery folds, which curve away from the hand, suggests that the arm was not raised or hanging down, as in many standing figures, but that the left arm rested inthe lap, as would be the case for a seated figure.7 The right arm was probably raised, perhaps holding a scepter, as in other semidraped imperial portraits. Using the standing Trajan in Copenhagen as a guide, the size of our head indicates that the figure would have been about 2.60-2.75 m tall if standing, while comparison with the complete seated figures of Tiberius from Privernum and Claudius from Leptis Magna suggests that ours would have been about 2.10-2.25 m tall if seated.8 A seated figure would be of appropriate size for the central niche over the porta regia, which has a restored height, to scale, of ca. 3.60 m. Moreover, the dimensions of the head indicate that this figure was significantly larger than any of the other figures that are associated with the niches (2-4). The best analogy for our draped hand is found in a seated imperial figure, the emperor from Veii in the Vatican Museums. Although on the Vatican figure two fingers and most of the sword held by the left hand are restored, enough survives to attest that, like ours, the portrait held an object such as a sword. In the Vatican figure the left hand rests on the thigh, one corner of the mantle lies across it, and the right arm was raised-the pose that best resembles that of our figure.9 Our sculpture may have been raised on a base for greater visibility from below. In light of the figure's size and the probable posthumous date, it seems likely that this portrait of Trajan would have been semidraped, following a drapery arrangement employed for emperors shown in Jupiter guise after the famous statue of Zeus by Pheidias at Olympia. It may have been seated in order to make reference to the Olympian Zeus and its followers. In fact, statues of emperors in seated Jupiter pose also occur in the late 2nd century, as the Marcus Aurelius and the posthumous Lucius Verus from the theater at Bulla Regia show. The colossal sculpture of Constantine the Great probably took this form as well.10For the proposed location of our figure on the facade, see above, pp. 9-11. The figure represented is a stern older man, and the scale suggests that the subject is imperial. There is a strong resemblance to portraits of the Trajanic period in the linear quality of the hair and the shape of the face, mouth, and ears. More specifically, the forking of the locks over the left temple, evident despite the break, shows affinities with portraits of Trajan. The colossal head from Ostia now in the Vatican, dated ca. A.D. 103, is generally similar, but a bust in Copenhagen, which is probably posthumous, provides a closer parallel. The Copenhagen portrait presents the heavier jaw and heavier wrinkles around the mouth and cheeks that are seen in Trajan's later portraits, such as a statue of him in Copenhagen and on the Submission of Dacia panel in the 6. De Grazia 1973, pp. 308-313, nos. 101, 102. 7. Cf. preparation for hand attachments for standing figures in hip-mantle pose, as in Niemeyer 1968, pls. 24, 25; or for seated figures inJupiter guise, Maderna 1988, no.JT 43, pl. 6:2. At Corinth, hands that are made separately for attachment typically have no drapery crossing their wrists, making the drapery arrangement here distinctive. 8. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 543 (inv. 1584): Niemeyer 1968, no. 47, pl. 15, H. 2.02 m. Tiberius from Privernum in the Vatican Museums, Museo Chiaramonti 1511: Maderna 1988, no.JT 41, pl. 15:2, H. 2.05 m. Claudius from Leptis Mag-

na in Tripolis:Maderna 1988, no.JT 43, pl. 6:2, H. 2.20 m. 9. Vatican Museums, Museo Chiaramonti 1641: Maderna 1988, no.JT 37, pl. 14:1, est. H. 2.0 m; the head, dated to the Neronian or EarlyFlavianera, does not belong. 10. On seated emperorsinJupiterguise, see Niemeyer 1968, nos. 83-94; Maderna1988, nos.JT 1-JT45. Cf. MarcusAurelius (Maderna1988, no.JT 11, pl. 12:2) and LuciusVerus(no.JT 12, pl. 12:1), both in Tunis,Bardo Museum;these formed part of a group including Lucilla and Crispinaas Ceres, dated ca. A.D. 178-182 (Fuchs1987,pp. 177-178, pls. 75-76). On Constantine, see Niemeyer 1968, no. 94; and Maderna 1988, no.JT 36.

64

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

attic of the Arch of Trajan at Beneventum, which was probably completed posthumously. The Copenhagen statue also exhibits the pattern of long, undulating hair on the top of the head." It is a second colossal head from Ostia, however, which was found near the Ostia theater and is dated to the Early Hadrianic period, that provides the firmest parallels, presenting a similarly shaped eye, lower lip, broad cheek, and jaw.12In fact, comparison with the three-lock hair pattern over this forehead suggests that the Corinth head may reproduce the right forehead lock and the strong separation between it and the downward-curving locks over the temples seen there. This late type of Trajan also appears in a head of Pentelic marble at Olympia, on which the hair pattern is similar but the hair mass is thicker.l3 In summary, the degree of plasticity and the softness in the hair, mouth, and jaw areas may suggest a Late Trajanic date, but the type as well as the scale make it possible that it was carved posthumously to represent the deified emperor.14 In addition, the scale of the Corinth head makes its identification as Trajan more likely than as a local figure rendered in a style influenced by depictions of the emperor. The influence of Trajan's portraits continued for some time, as can be seen in a private portrait at Corinth with a Trajanic hairstyle that is probably of Hadrianic date.15 Similar works are found in Athens, as in funerary portraits of a young man and his father, of Late Trajanic or Early Hadrianic date.16 These figures have similar hair arrangement and technique, rendering of the lower eyelids and inner corners of the eyes, and configuration of the lower lips. The comparison also highlights the high quality of the funerary pieces against the somewhat reduced quality of the Corinth figure, which was allowed by the latter's larger scale and greater viewing distance. Nonetheless, there is an analogous softness in the rendering of cheeks and ears. The herm portrait of Moiragenes from the Athenian Agora also combines a Trajanic head structure with softer Hadrianic rendering.17 The question remains as to why the wreath was removed and what this alteration says about the

portrait as a whole. Though fragmentary, the face shows no signs of recutting. Further, it seems likely that a head on such a large scale as this should represent an emperor, rather than an idealized type of figure.'8 The wreath, which could have been a thick oak wreath (corona civica) or the gold wreath of a triumphator, may have been removed when it was decided to emphasize a

different aspect of the emperor and to use the sculpture as a key element in the decoration of the Hadrianic scaenae frons. Although the custom of adapting the portrait of an earlier emperor to that of a later one has been shown to have been a frequent practice, this does not seem to be the case here.19 Corinth itself is not without other examples of such recutting, as de Grazia has pointed out.20 The wreath, then, which would have emphasized the civic or military aspect of Trajan, may have been removed when a portrait was created of the emperor as divus. It is also 11. Ostia head: OstiaV, p. 54, no. 79, pl. 46. Copenhagen bust: Poulsen 1974, pp. 66-67, no. 37, pls. 63-64; Gross 1940, p. 126, notes 16, 19, pl. 13:a; Johansen 1994-1995, II, pp. 102-103, no. 36 (inv. 1723). Copenhagen statue:Johansen 1994-1995, II, pp. 96-97, no. 34 (inv.1584). Beneventum:Rotili 1972, pp. 55-59, 157, pls. 120, 121, 123, 143; on the question of the date, see also Fittschen 1972. Also similar are the eyes of figures on the relief of Trajan'striumph in Palestrina,made after Trajan'sdeath (Musso 1987). 12. OstiaV,pp. 59-60, no. 89, pls. 52, 53; H. 0.50 m, of Greek marble. 13. Treu in OlympiaIII, p. 248, pl. 61.3 (H. 0.37 m); Goette and Hitzl (1987, esp. pls. 27, 28) remark that it was reworked from a Domitian that had an attachedwreath. See also Kleiner 1992, pp. 208-212, 263, fig. 17, and the possibly posthumous head of Trajanin Athens (NM 3294: Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 68), also of Pentelic marble. 14. See, e.g., Vierneisel and Zanker 1979, p. 10.

15. S-890, a bust in a medallion frame: CorinthIX, no. 173; de Grazia1973, pp. 132-136, no. 21; Ridgway1981b, p. 436. 16. Athens, NM 3085, 3086: Datsouli-Stavridi1985, pp. 5253, 55, pls. 56, 59-60 (autopsy); Rhomiopoulou 1997, p. 69, no. 67. 17. Agora S-586:AgoraI, pp. 35-37, no. 25, pl. 17; note also the technical differences in the hair between front and back. 18. Compare, e.g., the Dionysos statue in Rome, Museo Nazionale, and the group from San Ildefonso in Madrid described by Zanker (1974, no. 4, pl. 23; no. 21, pl. 30). 19. Examplesof recutting of imperialportraitsare collected inJucker 1981;Bergmann and Zanker1981; Pollini 1984; and Goette and Hitzl 1987 (the second example recut as Trajan). 20. De Grazia1973, no. 7 (S-2771), dated Tiberian,recut in the 3rd century (see also Ridgway1981b, p. 430); no. 45 (S1802), aJulio-Claudianhead recut in the mid-3rdcentury;no. 55 (S-697), dated to the second half of the 5th century and described as unfinished but probablyalso reworked.

IMPERIAL PORTRAITS IN THE NICHES

65

possible that the design was altered during production because of an unexpected flaw in the

stone or an irremediable mistake in carving.21

As is discussed elsewhere (see Chap. 4), Roman theaters have long witnessed the gathering of people for political and religious purposes. Theaters, or the porticoes attached to them, are a type of building where imperial portraits, sculpted or painted, could be effectively presented,

where they would be seen by the largest number of people, and where they would be a focus of religious ceremonies. Moreover, there is ample precedent for placing an imperial group on a scaenae frons. A number of imperial portraits are known that probably decorated the central niche of the scaena, as at Volterra, Dougga, Arles, and possibly Orange; and in other theaters imperial portraits may have stood between columns of the facade, as at Thera and possibly at Butrint.22As Rose has shown, Julio-Claudian imperial groups have been found or are indicated by inscriptions for some part of the theater in as many as 13 different locations.23 In the 2nd century the central niche usually seems reserved for an imperial figure, although some examples of nonimperial figures can also be associated with this position. Compare, for example, a colossal seated statue of Demos(?) of Antonine date found near the middle of the scene building of the theater at Ephesos and the late-2nd-century group of Hercules and Apollo

that formed part of the later decoration of the theater at Carthage.24 The present form of the sculpture was probably created during the major reworking of the scaenae frons early in the Hadrianic period.25 Sometime before the mid-120s, Trajan's titles and filiation are dropped from Hadrian's titulature and the title Hadrianus Augustus begins to appear in imperial coinage. Subsequently, after the celebration of his decennial anniversary, Hadrian strengthens his focus on Augustus. The selection of Trajan for the colossal figure in the central

niche rather than Augustus, then, may correspond better with the earlier portion of Hadrian's rule than with the period after ca. 125.26 It is more typical for the reigning emperor to be the central figure on a monument of this kind. Because, however, the dimensions of this head are

significantlylarger than the size of the other figures associated with the niches and because the head shape and hair correspond to known images of Trajan,the figure is identified as the deceased Trajan,not the ruling Hadrian. 21. For examples of the corona civica, see, e.g., images of Caligula in coinage after he adopts the title pater patriae; the standing portraits of Claudius from Lanuvium and Olympia; and the seated figures of Claudius and Tiberius from the theater at Caere, ca. A.D. 40-50; notably, Tiberius's portrait is posthumous (Kleiner 1992, pp. 127, 131, 133-134). Cf. Fittschen and Zanker 1985, pp. 7-10, no. 8, Augustus in the "Forbes" type, the wreath interpreted as a gold wreath indicating a triumphator. On the corona civica as symbolizing the virtus of the emperor, see Goette 1984, p. 588. On portraits of Trajan wearing the corona civica, see Riccardi 2000. 22. Volterra: Fuchs 1987, pp. 100, 166, statues of Augustus, Tiberius, and Livia, found in front of the scaena, the Augustus from the theater's original decoration; Rose 1997a, p. 126, no. 51, pl. 154, Tiberian. For the theater, see Fiumi 1976, pp. 1620, fig. 3. The first phase is dated 2/1 B.c. from the inscription, followed by two reworkings (Fuchs 1987, p. 101, no. B I 1). Dougga: Carton 1902, pl. 10:1,2; Pfeiffer 1931, p. 154, frontispiece, pl. 15:3, colossal seated figure found under the central second-story niche, identified as Lucius Verus; Bejor 1979, p. 44. Aries (Arelate): Niemeyer 1968, pp. 101-102, no. 71, pl. 23, head and torso of colossal statue with est. H. of 3.00 m, found in front of scaenae frons that has a central niche; Fuchs 1987, p. 174. Orange (Arausio): Bieber 1961a, p. 201, figs. 675-677; Esperandieu XII, pp. 28-29, no. 7979, standing, cuirassed with belt,

griffins, support beside r. leg, head missing, rest. H. 3.55 m, Antonine. Thera: TheraIII, pp. 249, 258-259. Butrint (Buthrotum):heads of Augustus,Agrippa,and Livia survive,as well as some over life-size torsos: Ugolini 1937, pp. 50, 51, 130-148, figs. 31, 32, 78-92; Rose 1997a, pp. 60, 136, no. 66, pls. 183-185. Unfortunately,I have not been able to consult Gilkes 2003. See Fuchs 1987, pp. 166-180, for epigraphical and sculptural evidence for imperial statuesin theaters. 23. Rose 1997a, nos. 5 (Caere), 6 (Casinum), 13 (Gabii), 19 (Luna), 51 (Volterra), 58 (Vaison-la-romaine),60 (Augusta Emerita), 63 (Tarraco), 66 (Buthrotum), 74 (Gytheum), 81 (Sparta),97 (Thera), 104 (Aphrodisias[?]). Not all can be associated with the facade. At AugustaEmeritathe imperial portraitswere found in a small room adjoining the peristyleof the theater (Rose 1997a, pp. 132-133, no. 60, pls. 174-176). 24. Fuchs (1987, pp. xiii-xiv, 166-180) suggeststhat the central niche is restricted for depiction of the emperor. Aurenhammer (EphesosX,i, pp. 165-167, no. 146) argues the Demos was probablyfrom a niche on the scaenae frons. On Carthage, see Ros 1996, pp. 449-484. 25. For a summaryof architecturalphases of the Theater, see above, pp. 3-7. 26. See Boatwright1987, pp. 72-73, note 115; Birley 1997, p. 147.

66

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES

2 Mantle statue, portrait of Augustus(?) P1.7 T-389/Sc.54. Statue:Theater,on stage,northof eastparodos, before the east hospitalium, 2.5 m above orchestra level, 1926. Supportwith drapery,no inv.no.: Theater,in squarerecessionbehind easthospitalium(CorinthNB 321, p. 514). Draperyfragment:east stage building at 6f, within easternrearcurveof scaenaefrons, 3.1 m aboveorchestralevel,on the exedrafloor,1928 (CorinthNB 320,p. 373). P.H. top of left shoulder to top of plinth 1.710, W. at neck break 0.157, W.waist0.363, Th. waist0.310, H. sternal notch to top of plinth 1.710, H. navel to top plinth 1.180; tree trunk:H. 0.450, W. 0.227, Th. 0.280; rest. H. ca. 2.00 to 2.05, rest. W. at shoulders 0.63 m. Male figure from base of neck to ankles, composed of ninejoining fragmentsand the edges of some folds; broken from the base of the neck through the right shoulder, and through the left lower calf and right ankle. Missing chips from the central front, outer surface of back, and the edges of many folds. The left hand and a segment of draperyalong the left side were attached. Bibliography:Shear 1926, p. 456; 1928a, p. 330; Reutersward 1960, p. 211, note 591, possibly an imperial statue;de Grazia1973, pp. 324-327, no. 105, Tiberian(?); Ridgway1981b, p. 434, note 51. Marble,white, fine to medium grained; streakywith mica; Pentelic. An over life-size male figure, semidraped in a large mantle, is shown in heroic seminudity,with the weight on the right leg and the left leg to the side and slightly forward. The left shoulder is raised to offset the raised right hip. The right arm was held close to the side, as indicated by the strut at the hip. The left hand, which was attached separately at the wrist, may have held an object, as in statues of similar type. The tree-trunksupport is mostly covered by draperyat proper left. The mantle hangs from the left shoulder, is wrapped about the hips leaving the torso bare, and is brought to

ON THE FACADE

rest over the left forearm, which is directed forward. The drapery, arranged logically, is carved with some variability, although a number of channels end abruptly in midfold. An angular dip under the front bunching is unexplained, as are three heavy channels in the material pulled above the bunch at right. The mantle is sharply undercut where it meets the torso, as if to strengthen the figure's outline, but it hangs in shallower folds at the side. Some of the highest projecting folds resemble bent tubes with curving inner sides. A fringe is incised along the vertical edge that is visible in front and on the lowest corner against the tree trunk. Much red pigment remains on the surface of the mantle in front. Where it is best preserved, on the underside of some folds, the color is quite deep (10R 4/6). A light brown pigment (7.5YR 7/4 to 6/4) is preserved on the skin above the mantle at the right hip and overlying some of the red on the mantle, and a yellower light brown tone remains on the legs (7.5YR 7/6).27 Draped surfaces preserve evidence of light rasping. The skin is very smoothly finished and has an unusually high degree of polish for the Theater sculptures, although not the extremely high polish of some late-2ndto early-3rd-century examples at Corinth. In back the figure is carefully worked, though with less detail than in front. A long drapery segment was attached at proper left (original L. 0.400, W. 0.200 m) to a surface smoothly worked with a claw chisel and small point, aided by a small dowel (W. 0.010 m).28 The joint for attachment of the left hand, more roughly dressed by a point, was recessed beneath the roll of drapery over the wrist. The head was carved in one piece with the statue, as in Early Roman portraits from the Julian Basilica at Corinth.29 A cutting at the lower back of the tree trunk would have secured the trunk to a base. Tiberian to Claudian.

This statue, missing its head, hands, and feet, very likely represents an emperor in an idealized guise wearing a "hip mantle." The pose is the same as that of the Copenhagen Tiberius, with the variation that one end of the mantle is here brought up over the left shoulder and continues down the arm.30This drapery arrangement and the greater curve in the bunch around the hips gives the statue a more classical sense of unity, bringing it closer in structure to the Greek prototype. A similar drapery arrangement over the shoulder is seen on the standing statue of Tiberius from the Claudian group in the Old Forum at Leptis Magna, on which part of the mantle rests on the left shoulder but does not extend down to the forearm as on the Corinth sculpture.31 The 27. The unusual amount of pigment preserved on this and other sculptures from the Theater, which Shear considered surprising in light of the very damp soil, led to his article on color (Shear 1928a). It wasalso cause for comment by Reutersward (1960, p. 211, note 591). See also the Aphrodite head (15), the LudovisiAres head (16), the Doryphoros head (20), and among architectural sculptures, the Silenos piers (11, 12). 28. The shape of this attachment is not a feature of Roman statuary alone, as is shown by an Archaic scribe from the Athenian Akropolis (Schrader 1939, pp. 207-209, no. 309, pl. 132:b). 29. Corinth S-1116, S-1065, S-1080, "Gaius" and "Lucius" Caesar and Augustus: CorinthIX, nos. 134-136; de Grazia 1973, nos. 10-12.

30. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 538 (inv. 709):

Poulsen 1962, no. 47; Niemeyer 1968, no. 74, pl. 24:1, mid-lst century A.C.; Johansen 1994-1995, I, no. 48, mid-lst-century copy of a Tiberian work. Compare the Augustus in the Vatican Museums, Sala a Croce Greca 559: Bieber 1977, pp. 42, 191, fig. 787; Niemeyer 1968, p. 102, no. 73, Late Tiberian. 31. Niemeyer 1968, p. 57, no. 77, pl. 25, in the Tripolis Museum, dated A.D. 45-46. A portrait of Aelius Verus in the Louvre adopts the same arrangement (Bieber 1977, p. 219, fig. 859). Cf. also Kraus 1967, no. 289, and West 1933, p. 191, for the statue of Germanicus from Gabii, now in Paris, of ca. A.D. 20, on which the drapery is less stiff than that on the Ravenna relief with an imperial group (for the latter, see Strong 1988, fig. 54; Rose 1997a, pp. 100-102); its drapery is more comparable to that of the Pozzuoli base in Naples of A.D. 17 (Strong 1988, fig. 59).

IMPERIAL PORTRAITS IN THE NICHES

67

arrangement of the mantle hanging from left shoulder to arm is better paralleled in seated statues in Jupiter costume, such as the Vatican Tiberius and the Tripolis Claudius, and also a

fragmentarycolossal figure at Corinth, which was probably an imperial portrait.32The Theater statue may borrow from these two types so as to achieve a more classical effect. The Corinth Theater statue presents two other variations on established types. The support

has been moved to the opposite side-the side of the free leg-from that preferred. This provides extra support for the hanging drapery,which partiallymasks the tree trunk, but it restricts the movement of the free leg.33As a result, the free leg is placed to the side, rather than back, with the knee projecting forward, and the figure appears to be standing rather than walking.34 Both adjustments may derive from the statue's destined context. Although its original context is

unknown, it may have stood against a wall. The mantle fringe and influence of imperial types might suggest that the garment worn is a toga, but the density of the folds, its arrangement, and the straight edge at proper left indicate that it is the Greek himation (Latin pallium), contributing another classical element to the sculpture.35 The squared proportions and smooth, even rendering heighten the classical effect. The

classical features reflect tastes of the EarlyImperial period in Greece, and the statue may have been made for displayin the EarlyRoman theater. Stillwellplaced the major EarlyRoman phase in the Late Augustan to Early Tiberian period. Part of an inscription, however, records a dedication to Claudius that is dated to A.D. 42.36 If this inscription refers to the Theater as a whole rather than to a single section, the statue might be considered Early Claudian rather than Late

Augustan to Tiberian, as previouslythought.37Zankersuggested that the standing type with hip mantle was first created for the cult statue of Julius Caesar in Rome, whereas Maderna argued

that the format began in the Claudianperiod.38In either case, the Theater statue is not in exactly the same format as the Claudian statues cited. Its closest stylistic parallels, such as the Copenhagen

Tiberius, are placed in the mid-lst century A.C., though the Copenhagen Tiberius may reflect an earlier monument. Given the circularityof most stylisticarguments, it would be better to allow the building to suggest the date of the sculpture. As described above, pp. 9-11, this sculpture appears to have been reused in the Hadrianic scaenae frons, where it most likely stood in the niche over the east hospitalium: the findspot at the east end of the stage and 2.5 m above orchestra level invites this suggestion.39 On the theory

that this sculpture was set on the scaenae frons opposite a female figure that likely depicted Livia, the two of them flanking Trajan, and that it figuratively supported the reign of Hadrian, it is most

likely a posthumous depiction of an emperor-probably Augustus. The high qualityof the conception and finish is appropriate for an imperial subject, especially for one presented as divus.

Tiberius, by contrast, is unlikely to have been placed on the Theater facade after his death, and especially not in the Hadrianic period, when it was the Augustan period with which parallels

were regularly drawn for ideological ends.40 In the likening of Augustus to a deity as sebastus, Apollo would have presented the most likely counterpart, given Augustus's attention to Apollo's 32. Tiberius, Vatican Museums, Museo Chiaramonti 1511: Niemeyer 1968, no. 85, pl. 28, Claudian; Maderna 1988, p. 109, no. JT 41, pls. 10:1, 15:2. Claudius, Tripolis: Niemeyer 1968, no. 90, pl. 31, A.D. 45-46; Maderna 1988, no. JT 43, pl. 6:2. S-1098: Corinth IX, no. 138; de Grazia 1973, pp. 328-331, no. 107, Claudian. It seems unlikely that this piece derives from the same period as the group of Augustus and his adoptive sons, as the drapery is so different. 33. Contrast the Tiberius in Tripolis with the support behind the left, weight leg (Niemeyer 1968, no. 77, pl. 25), which has a fluid Polykleitan stance with an open arrangement on the right. In the Claudian Augustus in Thessaloniki, on the other hand, the support is behind the right, weight leg, allowing the left leg to be pulled back, in a mirror image of the Tripolis Tiberius (Niemeyer 1968, p. 102, no. 76, pl. 24:3; Maderna 1988, p. 157). Our pose is more static by comparison.

34. The stance is like that of Claudiusin the Villa Borghese, inv. XXXIX: Bieber 1977, p. 42, fig. 93; EA 2713. Cf. also the statuefrom the Macellumin Pompeii, Naples, MuseoNazionale 6044: Bonifacio 1997, pp. 44-46, mid-lst century A.C. 35. For the use of the Greek himation in Roman portraits, see Bieber 1977, pp. 129-147. 36. CorinthVIII,iii, p. 40, no. 74, pl. 7. 37. Stillwellin CorinthII, p. 135. 38. Zanker1988, p. 249, fig. 194; Maderna1988, pp. 18-19, nos. JS 1, JS 8, pls. 2, 4. Dating of the hip mantle is also discussed in Niemeyer 1968, p. 57. 39. The height of the pulpitum is estimated at 1.3 m above the orchestra floor (CorinthII, p. 77), so the statue appears to have been found above the level of the stage. 40. See Boatwright1987, pp. 51-52, 72-73,96, 179-181; and Birley 1997, p. 147.

68

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

cult in Rome and the presence at Corinth, in the Theater, of an EarlyRoman altar to Apollo (51).41 The portrait here identified as that of Augustus probably once stood in the Early Roman

theater and, survivingdestruction in the earthquakeof A.D.77, was availablefor reuse in the 2nd century. 3

Draped female figure, Livia(?)

Pls. 8, 9

P1. 8:a Upper torso S-3565. Theater, near the east entrance to the west parados, next to buttress at A5, 1.0 m below top of buttress, 1929; identified from drawing in Corinth NB 323, p. 91. P.L. 0.287, p.W. 0.190, p.Th. 0.157 m. Single fragment from the right side of a draped female upper torso; broken across right shoulder, atjuncture of arm, vertically down right side, horizontally above waist and diagonally through central torso. Missing large chip from right side of breast, chips from outer edges of folds; most surfaces heavily weathered and worn, with some encrustation. 3A

Pls. 8:b-d, 9 Draped legs Theater. S-564 (largest segS-564/998/999/1009. ment): tr. 34b, west-central scaenae frons, a little above stage level, 1903 (Corinth NB 56, p. 71). S-998/999/1009: tr. 34, 1909. Brought in from Theater in 1994. P.H. figure 0.928, H. plinth 0.090, p.W. 0.650, Th. at top 0.355 m. Four joining fragments, draped figure from upper thighs to feet; broken at a diagonal through upper thighs. Missing chips from plinth front, tips of toes, and edges of higher folds; the front of the right knee and thigh is heavily abraded. Bibliography: CorinthIX, p. 66, no. 113 (no photo). 3B

3A-B: Marble, white, fine to medium grained; micaceous; Pentelic. These pieces are grouped due to their similar marble, scale, and figure type. 3A contains the front right portion of a female upper torso somewhat over life-size, wearing a light garment, probably a chiton. The breast is of mature proportions and slightly fleshy. The right arm was held away from the torso and raised, leaving the side free. Above, long incisions suggest creases in thin

material, while below are three crisp, twisting folds that are more deeply undercut at right. A mantle that was pulled across the waist toward the left arm may have resulted in the folds' turning or bending toward the center of the statue. The central break occurs along the line of a raised fold that is characterized as crinkly, like the fold to proper right, which resembles a ribbon. Light rasp marks remain on the side, perhaps from the undercutting of the adjacent arm. 3B preserves the legs of a standing, draped figure with weight on the left leg, the right leg pulled to the side and slightly back, the foot resting flat on the ground. The figure wears a chiton, visible at her left and in back, over which a himation is draped around the legs, reaching to the plinth, where it rests between the feet. The himation is full and weighty, especially at the U-shaped sag between the feet and on the outside of both feet, creating a concentration of weight near the base. Vertical hanging folds are partially preserved at left. The feet wear open sandals with raised soles and projecting ridges above and below. The right sandal is visible from the side, but only a small portion of the left survives. The straps are not carved and were probably rendered in paint, though no traces remain. The drapery arrangement is logical, clear, and uncluttered, with surfaces between major folds handled plastically over the free leg, more smoothly over the weight leg. A sense of elegance is created by the curve sweeping upward from the right foot toward the waist at left and by the elongated proportions. The advanced right knee gives the impression that the figure is engaged in a slow walk along a diagonal toward her left, the direction in which the head possibly faced. The surfaces were carefully smoothed, only light rasping remaining. The plinth is undercut at left. Two clamps anchored the plinth to the base, one under the right heel, the other on the back at left; neither would have been seen from a front or three-quarter view. Early Imperial.

3A and 3B appear to be of the same marble, a predominantly fine-grained white marble with little visible mica, which is of much better quality than most of the marble from the Theater. They seem carved at about the same scale, with a restored height of 1.90 to 2.00 m. The two can also be associated on the basis of their find contexts: 3A's near the inner entrance to the west parades and 3B's in the 1903 trench over the western part of the stage (see Plan I). Further, 3A was found near the top of a buttress and 3B above the level of the stage, which suggests a connection for both with an upper level of the scaenae frons. In fact, as is discussed elsewhere (p. 10), the niche over the western hospitalium seems a likely location because of the over life-size scale, the body type, and the possible date and identification of the reconstructed piece. In the absence of a head, identification of this statue is dependent on context and figure type. As outlined above in the Introduction, the Hadrianic theater follows the "western plan" of the 41. For the cult in Rome, see, e.g., Zanker 1988, pp. 52-53, 68-69, 85-89; Richardson 1992, p. 14, s.v. ApolloPalatinus, Aedes; and Galinsky 1996, pp. 213-244.

IMPERIAL PORTRAITS IN THE NICHES

69

early 2nd century, with three large semicircles, into which aediculae are set, providing four areas

for the prominent displayof sculpture. The portraitof Trajan(1), which is assigned to the largest space, in the second story over the porta regia, can be understood in the context of dynastic portrait groups throughout the empire. The presence of this colossal statue of Trajan on the scaenae frons makes it likely that a dynastic group was featured here.42 Moreover, as with its

probable male companion piece (2), the high-qualityrendering of this figure seems commensurate with an EarlyImperial date. The best comparison for this Corinth figure is the basalt portrait poin ofAgrippina the Younger in Copenhagen/Rome,

which follows a figure type referred to as the "PrayingWoman" or "orans."43

In this type a woman wears a chiton with "fussy"raised folds that extend down from the right shoulder-fastening and contrast with broad areas of transparent material over the breast. Above the right breast one fold turns sharply toward the figure's center, and on the lower part of the breast, folds turn in the same direction, as on 3A. On the Copenhagen/Rome figure the bunched

edge of the cloak is draped across the waist, where it is pressed against the chiton. Our figure possibly had also pulled the mantle to her left to anchor it under her arm, and in the process pulled the chiton folds to her left. The Copenhagen/Rome statue wearsa mantle that is brought up over the head in back and is wrapped around the right arm, from which the edges hang. In the type, the mantle is pulled around the legs in a number of broad folds, as in 3B; and it similarly dips between the feet-in some examples to the plinth, in others not-thereby revealing the lower edge of the chiton.44 The left, supporting leg is masked by the thick mantle before it. Other examples of the "Praying Woman" type, such as a restored figure in the Museo Nazionale in Rome and a porphyry statue with restored head in Paris, also contain the fussy elaboration of chiton folds, the mantle drooping toward the plinth in front, and the open sandals.45 Portraits of the primaryJulio-Claudian imperial women seem to vary in type and arrangement of costume and shoes, depending on their intended location and associated deity or title. The stola seems used when the figure is shown as a real person, for example, as a priestess, and the chiton when depicted in the guise of a divinity.46In a statue from the basilica at Ocriculum, Livia wears a stola, which is clearly rendered over the upper torso and is visible beneath the mantle between her closed shoes.47 This format is generally similar to 3 with the exception of the stola, whose right edge is emphasized, and the closed shoes. On our upper torso the crinkly folds, the lack of an outer edge, and the sharp bend to viewer's right under the breast make it clear that this is not a stola, but a chiton. The standing Livia in the guise of Ceres/Tyche from the theater at Leptis Magna wears a chiton, mantle, and open sandals, with the mantle crossing the torso diagonally. The statue of Livia from the odeion at Carthage is similarly dressed.48 Likewise, two variations of Agrippina the Younger are known from Olympia, both with the diagonal arrangement across the chest.49 42. For a discussion of Julio-Claudian imperial groups, see Rose 1997a, esp. pp. 7-10, 51-53, on the possibility of identifying members of such groups based on their context, even when fragmentary or divergent from main types. See also Bartman 1999, pp. 3-11. 43. The body, Rome, Capitoline Museums, Museo Nuovo 1882: Helbig4, II, no. 1733; Bieber 1977, fig. 811; Fuchs 1983, fig. 229, a copy of an Ionian bronze of ca. 380-370 B.c. The joining head, Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 753: Johansen 1994-1995, I, pp. 152-153, no. 64. Referred to as in Bertoletti et al. 1997, no. 11.44, figs. Capitoline/Copenhagen on pp. 22, 62. 44. On the torso, see Belli Pasqua 1995, pp. 82-84, where the orans type is discussed. On the inappropriate naming of this type, see Bartman 1999, pp. 8, 42, 47. 45. Rome, Museo Nazionale 68: Felletti Maj 1953, no. 237; Bieber 1977, fig. 809; MusNazRom, I, 2, pp. 61-62, no. 47. Paris, Louvre 2226: Delbrueck 1932, p. 74, pl. 24, H. 2.05 m with stephane, head not pertinent as neck is restored; Bieber 1977,

fig. 810. Cf. also the well-preservedbronze statue of Liviafrom the theater at Herculaneum, found with a togate bronze of Tiberius, Naples, Museo Nazionale 5589: Fuchs 1987, pp. 28-29, no. C I 2, pl. 6:2, H. 2.00 m. 46. Rose 1997a, pp. 75-76, 97-98. 47. VaticanMuseums,Saladei Busti 637: Helbig4,I, no. 183; Bieber 1977, pp. 197-198, fig. 807; Rose 1997a, pp. 97-98, no. 25, pl. 89, H. 2.02 m, EarlyTiberian;Bartman 1999, pp. 9, 13, no. 22, figs. 9, 10, head of Fayumtype, last decade B.C.For the stola, cf. Bieber 1977, pp. 23, 25, fig. 19, Frankfurttorso; Sebesta 1994a, pp. 48-50; Goldman 1994a, pp. 224-228, fig. 2:1; and Scholz 1992. 48. LeptisMagna,Tripoli,ArchaeologicalMuseum:Bartman 1999, p. 107, no. 74, fig. 85, A.D. 35-36(?). Carthage, Tunis, Bardo Museum, C 933: Bartman 1999, p. 47, no. 67, fig. 45, probablyClaudian,H. 2.65 m. 49. Berlin, StaatlicheMuseen SK 1400: Rose 1997a, no. 80, pl. 192. Olympia,Archaeological Museum A 143: Rose 1997a, pl. 193.

70

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

Despite its fragmentary state, the Corinth piece appears closest to the basalt statue in Rome that has the horizontal mantle arrangement across the waist. The Corinth statue could have depicted an Early Imperial woman portrayed as a deity, such as Pietas.50It could have been adapted to Livia, if that was not its original identity, for secondary use on the Hadrianic scaenae frons. The Augustan through Claudian periods are the primary times of artistic representation of Livia, but her cult continues into the second half of the 2nd century A.C.51Known statues of Livia that were set up in theaters include examples at Caere, Volterra, Ferentium, Herculaneum(?), Buthrotum, Leptis Magna, and the odeion at Carthage, where the image was seemingly reused in the early-3rd-century structure.52 Given the large number of portraits of Livia that have been recognized, it is in fact surprising that Corinth has not produced one, though a statue base sacred to Diana Pacilucifera and a dedication to Livia survive from the Tiberian and Claudian periods. Moreover, Livia was offered music and poetry at the Caesarea festival at Corinth or Isthmia. In addition, Corinth has been described as "careful to honor all potential successors to the throne" in its coinage.53 This figure type, in pose, style, and proportions, follows prototypes of the second quarter to the mid-4th century B.C., which themselves contain elaborations of 5th-century B.C.features. For example, the chiton of 3A evokes styles from the 430s B.C., such as that of Torso K from the Parthenon East Pediment.54 The combination of transparency and twisted, ridged folds below the breast recalls the Nike of Paionios, created shortly after 425 B.C.55 Comparison with Paionios's Nike, moreover, helps clarify the identity of the garment of 3A as a chiton, since it lacks fold lines above the breast and under the arm that would indicate the arm opening of a peplos.56 The drapery is stretched farther across the right side of the breast and the area above it than in peplos-wearing figures. The ribbon- and scratched renderings of the chiton also resemble the garment of "Iris"(Torso N) from the Parthenon West Pediment57 and the Hera Borghese type of ca. 420.58 In addition, in its scratched folds, echoing 5th-century types, and scale, it recalls the female torso wearing a chiton from the Roman pediment of Temple E at Corinth.59 The proportions of the Theater torso, however, are fuller and the impression more fully classical. The lower part of the figure recalls sculptures of ca. 340 B.C. that were used for depictions of Kore/Persephone and attributed by some to the artist Praxiteles or his school.60 This type became so popular that it appeared in multiple versions already in the 4th century. The smaller figure of Kore dedicated by Lykourgis in Kos, for instance, is a simplified version with less volume in the mantle.61 The Kore with the Torches from Kos is also close and includes the flattening of 50. On the orans type used for ruler portraits, especially that of Livia and its political use as an embodiment of Pietas, see Landwehr 1993, pp. 83-86, no. 61. 51. Bartman 1999, pp. 134-138, 140-141, notes 46, 114. 52. Cf. Bartman 1999, p. 130 (Caere); Fuchs 1987, pp. 28 (Herculaneum), 91 (Ferentium), 100-101 (Volterra), 166 (Leptis Magna), 177 (Carthage);and Rose 1997a, pp. 60, 136, no. 66, pl. 185 (Buthrotum). 53. Statue base: CorinthVIII, ii, no. 15 (Bartman 1999, p. 114, EpigCat. no. 39). Dedication to Livia:CorinthVIII, iii, no. 55 (Bartman 1999, p. 114, EpigCat. no. 72). On the Caesarea, see CorinthVIII, i, no. 19; ii, p. 64; and Biers and Geagan 1970. On the coins, see the quotation in Rose 1997a, p. 43. 54. Torso K is of comparable proportions, but the drapery here lacksthe degree of transparencyand has more ridgedfolds over the top and side of the breast;see Brommer 1963a, pp. 17, 18, 20, pls. 46, 47. 55. Ridgway1981a,pp. 108-111, fig. 84; Holscher 1974, esp. p. 73, fig. 2, for a good side view. 56. See the discussion of problems of interpreting the chiton and peplos in Ridgway1981a, p. 109. 57. Lippold 1950, pl. 55:3;Brommer 1963a, pp. 45-47,168, pls. 111-113.

58. Copenhagen, Ny CarlsbergGlyptotek237, which does not have sleeves, but a more open area above the right breast: Lippold 1950, p. 188, pl. 66:2;Fuchs 1983, fig. 222; Landwehr 1985, pp. 88-94, no. 53, pls. 54-55; LIMCIV,p. 671, no. 102, s.v. Hera (Kossatz-Deissmann).A variantis the Hera Barberini in the Vatican Museums, also without sleeves: Helbig4, I, no. 40; Amelung VatKat,III, 1, p. 126, no. 546, pls. 37-39. On the type, see Zancani-Montuoro1933, esp. the photographs. Cf. also the piece in Rome, Museo Nazionale 51: Helbig4,III, no. I, 1, no. 139. 2262; MusNazRom, 59. Freeman in CorinthI, ii, pp. 222, 226, no. 18, fig. 182, Flavian. For an interpretation of the piece as Antonine, see Haskell 1980. 60. The attribution,however,is not secure.Cf.the Florentine Kore/Persephone typein the Uffizi,inv. 120, though with head, lower mantle, and feet restored:Rizzo 1932, pl. 154:a;Lippold 1950, p. 237; Bieber 1977, fig. 795; Filges 1997, pp. 50-67, no. 71, EarlyAntonine. Cf. depictions of Kore on votive reliefs, as Athens, NM 1461, from Peiraieus:Lippold 1950, pl. 85:4. See also Peschlow-Bindokat 1972; Neumann 1979; and Baumer 1997, pp. 31-42. 61. Kos 44: Kabus-Preisshofen1975, cat. B, pp. 33, 39-42, pl. 13, H. 0.80 m, type stemming from the early 4th century; Filges 1997, pp. 18, 29-31, 251, no. 47, mid-4thcenturyB.C.Cf.

IMPERIAL PORTRAITS IN THE NICHES

71

the mantle on the base, although a small segment of chiton is visible below the mantle in front, an arrangement also seen in the Vienna Kore.62A late-4th-centurystatue in Delphi continues the tradition into the EarlyHellenistic period.63In the Augustan period, this format is adapted to the "PrayingWoman"type, a figure that probablyheld attributesin each hand. The rendering of the Corinth sculpture seems commensurate with an EarlyRoman date. The execution is not characterized by deep, hard grooves, straight edges, or drilled undercutting, which occur in certain areas of the 2nd-centuryAmazon (67) and the Youthas Hermes (74); and the folds beneath the breast are worked primarilywith the flat chisel. Attention should also be drawn to the statue's three-dimensional quality.The statue may originally have stood against a wall, but it was probablydisplayedso that it would be seen to advantagefrom either three-quarter view. The scale and careful workmanship convey the importance of the dedication. The lower half of a smaller figure, found on the west side of the Corinth Forum, may represent a simplified version of the same type, pointing to the local importance of the subject or the adaptabilityof the type.64For two works that might be associated with its display in the Early Roman theater complex, see the semidraped figure of Augustus(?) (2), and the EarlyImperial togatus (34) (and see above, p. 33). 4

Cuirassed statue of Hadrian(?)

P1. 10

P1. 10:a Gorgoneion S-3570. Theater, west scaenae frons, between concrete Roman foundations, 1.5 m below marble strosis, 1929 (Corinth NB 323, p. 97, plan p. 92). P.L. 0.182, p.W. 0.163, p.Th. 0.043, p.W. face 0.103 m. Single fragment of a gorgoneion; broken all around the head and vertically from core of statue; missing most of hair. Chips missing from eyes, nose, and chin. Traces of red paint (10R 5/8) preserved inside the mouth. 4A

P1. 10:b Fragmentary relief from cuirass with Nike S-3672. Museum marble pile, exact provenance unknown. "A P" is written in pencil on the piece, possibly indicating "April," probably 1926. P.L. 0.144, p.W. 0.208, p.Th. 0.077 m. Single fragment; broken all around. Front surface chipped, worn, and heavily weathered.

4B

P1. 10:c Fragmentary draped torso S-575. Theater, tr. 34b, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 75). P.L. 0.153, p.W. 0.147, p.Th. 0.060 m. Single fragment; broken on all sides. Front surface heavily worn, chipped, and encrusted.

4C

P1. 10:d Fragmentary mantle with socket S-1013. Theater, tr. 34, 1909. P.L. 0.189, p.W. 0.184, p.Th. 0.103 m. Single fragment; garment broken along two planes. Edges of folds chipped, weathered.

4D

the Grimani statuette in Venice: Kabus-Jahn1963, pp. 14-16, pl. 2; Filges 1997, pp. 28, 30, 163, 250, no. 40, early4th century. See also the Vienna Kore: Kabus-Jahn1963, pp. 10-13; Filges 1997, pp. 1-10, 110-116, 205,222,280, no. 178, LateHadrianic; Lippold 1950, p. 290, pl. 86:3; and related Kore types:KabusJahn 1963, pp. 1-22; Filges 1997, passim. Cf. also Hera of Ephesos: Borbein 1973, pp. 126-138, fig. 49. None of the figures illustrated have a skirt comparable to the Corinth lower torso. On Greek adaptations,see Baumer 1997, esp. pp. 31-43 on the Florentine Kore and related types.

4E

P1. 10:e, f Fragmentary booted leg S-981. Theater, tr. 34, 1910. P.L. 0.214, p.W. 0.111, Th. 0.085; cutting: p.L. 0.070, p.W. 0.070, max. D. 0.147 m. Single fragment; leg broken diagonally through booted lower leg along micaceous veins. Surfaces worn, most of bootstrap chipped away. 4F

P1. 10:g Fragmentary booted right(?) foot S-3682-21. Museum marble pile; provenance unknown. P.L. 0.126, p.W. 0.106, p.Th. 0.089, est. orig. W. ca. 0.18 m. Single fragment; boot broken through top and its

support. 4G

P1. 10:h Fragmentary foot with flat strap(?) S-979. Theater, tr. 34, 1910. P.L. 0.125, p.W. 0.053, p.Th. 0.037 m. Single fragment, foot broken all around, chipped, worn, weathered. P1. 10:i Fragmentary left foot S-3645. Museum marble pile, no. 436. The piece is marked "SIER,"identifying it as from Shear's excavations. P.L. 0.146, p.W. 0.069, Th. 0.083 m. Single fragment; foot broken along two diagonals.

4H

4A-H: Marble, white, fine grained; heavy micaceous veins, pink and green; probably Pentelic. These eight fragments are associated based on their similar material, over life-size scale, and condition. 4A pre62. Kabus-Preisshofen1975, cat. C, pp. 33, 43-46, fig. 5, pl. 16;Filges 1997, pp. 18-23, 25, 27, 148, 163, 249, no. 38, second half of the 4th century,reflecting a Parian/Attic original of the late 5th century B.C.

63. Delphi: Picard and de la Coste-Messeliere1927, p. 39, pl. 72. 64. S-74-28:Soles 1976, pp. 204, 226-228, no. 74, where it is tentativelyidentified as the Aphrodite of Aries type. No chiton is depicted in back, perhaps as a result of simplification.

72

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

serves a gorgoneion sliced from the chest of an over lifesize cuirassed statue. At proper right, a small section of hair, blown in wisps away from the face, is sketchily rendered with a flat chisel. No drillwork is evident. Above the hair are the remains of two flat-sided sections from the right wing. Part of one body of the pair of snakes tied beneath the chin waves to right. The gorgon's grimace is characterized by exaggerated modeling. The poor state of preservation is misleading in regard to quality of finish. Most of the preserved surfaces are smoothed, and few tool marks remain. The broad mouth is open, but there is no trace of the tongue on the lower lip. 4B shows a segment from the lower right of the breastplate from a large, cuirassed statue, decorated with a draped "Nike" in low relief flying to the viewer's right. The Nike's bare, lower left leg and foot are set off by the drapery blowing around them. The lower edge of her right leg survives at the right break, which coincides with the line of the outward turn of the breastplate at bottom. Most tool marks have been eliminated; only a few strokes of a rasp remain over parts of the lower curve of the breastplate. The sculpture appears to have been intentionally broken apart. 4C is a segment of a broadly curving surface on which a small semicircular depression survives at one break, and across which projects a straight, then curved, raised element painted red. These features suggest the heavy edge or prominent fold from a garment. The surface is carefully smoothed. 4D comes from a curving portion of a figure wearing a mantle, probably the shoulder because of the large

socket cut for insertion of another piece, possibly the upper arm. The prepared lower surface is flat, with a rim 0.050 m high, the dimensions of the dowel (D. 0.055, W. at top 0.020 m) possibly square. 4E probably preserves the lower portion of a booted leg from an over life-size, standing male statue. Part of one horizontal bootstrap survives, most of which has been chipped off. The bumpy surface may indicate that the piece derives from the side or back of a sculpture that would not be seen close up. The leg was pieced using a long, wide cutting with a straight border on one side, as if it were attached by means of a marble tenon, rather than a metal clamp or dowel. 4F shows the right central portion of a large, booted foot, crossed by two wide straps in low relief. This piece appears to represent part of a right foot. It is larger than the feet in the Captives' Facade at Corinth (W. ca. 0.14 m), wears a different kind of boot, and is not undercut in front as they are.65The foot was pieced, as is shown by the round dowel cutting (p.L. 0.063, diam. 0.012 m), where orange stains from the iron dowel survive. 4G has a small portion of curving anatomy with part of a wide cross strap, the outer surface of which is mostly chipped away. It may come from the side of a foot or the rib cage of a large figure. 4H preserves part of the central left side of a left foot, possibly booted, which was raised on the ball of the foot. The underside has been worked with a claw chisel, possibly in preparation for piecing. Hadrianic.

These eight fragments may represent a single cuirassed statue with decorated breastplate from the Theater. Most are securely tied to the Theater excavations as well as to the scaenae frons, and they are included here as an example of what might belong together, but the associations are by no means certain. 4A was found in 1929 in the foundations of the scaenae frons beside the west hospitalium. Four others, 4C, 4D, 4E, and 4G, were discovered in 1903, 1909, and 1910 in trenches closer to the center of the scaenae frons, while 4F appeared during excavations in the 1920s, possibly in the cavea (see Plan I). The fragments can, for other reasons, be ascribed more specifically to the decoration of the facade. The costume corresponds with the identity of an imperial figure that is otherwise missing from the group, and the fragmentation seems commensurate with a location on the highest level of the facade. Moreover, red paint is preserved on the gorgon, a feature that is characteristic of many facade sculptures. The only segment preserved well enough for chronological analysis is the gorgoneion (4A). Features that might be diagnostic are the wavy,unbound hair, the strongly modeled face, and the wide mouth, which is open but without a tongue.66 The distinctive wispy hair and strongly modeled cheeks here are similar to a gorgon from a marble torso in Lugano, which Stemmer considers Early Trajanic work.67 The modeling of our gorgon, however, is more emphatic and more 65. On the Captives' Facade, see Corinth IX, no. 217; Vermeule 1986, pp. 71-73, fig. 2. 66. In general, see LIMC IV, pp. 285-330, pls. 163-188, s.v. Gorgo/Gorgones (Krauskopf); pp. 345-362, pls. 195-207, s.v. Gorgones Romanae (Paoletti); Halm-Tisserant 1986; and Floren 1977. Stemmer (1978, p. 172) lists 13 cuirassed statues at Corinth. See also de Grazia 1973, pp. 302-323, nos. 99-104. For the best-preserved gorgoneia at Corinth, see S-1081 (Corinth IX, no. 143; de Grazia 1973, no. 103, Hadrianic; Stemmer 1978,

p. 172;Vermeule 1959-1960, no. 197, pl. XVI);S-1125 (Corinth IX, no. 141; de Grazia1973, no. 99, Claudian;Stemmer 1978, p. 172;Vermeule 1959-1960, no. 23, pl.V); S-1162/3 (Stemmer 1978, no. IV 3a, Late Hadrianicto EarlyAntonine, with griffins but no wings preserved); and S-1430 (Stemmer 1978, no. III 21, Late Flavian[?]). 67. Lugano: Stemmer 1978, p. 16, no. I lOa,pl. 7. Unfortunately,it is difficult to studythe rendering of gorgons on many statues, as detailed photographs are lacking.

IMPERIAL PORTRAITS IN THE NICHES

73

linear, contrasting with the plastic modeling throughout the face of the Lugano gorgon and its soft, closed, almost dimpled mouth. The cuirassed statue of Hadrian in Rome of the Early Hadrianic Stazione Termine type displays a gorgon with flying, unbound locks.68There, however, the hair is longer and curlier, and the cheeks very smooth. This gorgon can be contrasted with the one on Herakles' shield from the Theater reliefs, whose hair is firmly contained within its outer contour and whose round, fleshy face lacks deep modeling about the mouth-aspects

that are possibly corollaries of its size.69 Gorgons on later

cuirassed portraits of Hadrian likewise have hair firmly retained within a boundary that ends above the ears and an open mouth with extended tongue.70 The best comparison for our gorgon's features is found on the cuirass of the statue of Hadrian from the odeion at Troy, where the hair

also flies out from the face in short strands and the protruding tongue is omitted. The Troy Hadrian appears to be of Hadrianic date, perhaps early because the head follows the "Rollockenfrisur" type and exhibits a lack of drillwork, except in the gorgon's hair.71It is difficult to tell

how long this portrait type might have been used in the provinces, but the evidence of the Troy Hadrian can be added to other indications that the Theater sculptures may be of mid-Hadrianic date. The modeling may be particularlyexaggerated in our gorgon because the figure would be seen from a distance and in strong sunlight. The statue's size can be estimated from dimensions of the gorgon's face. The original width of the face, over half of which is preserved, was ca. 0.115 m, so its head, including hair,would have been ca. 0.17 m wide. This gorgon is somewhatlarger than that of Corinth S-1081from theJulian Basilica, which has been dated to the Late Hadrianic to EarlyAntonine period. The Julian Basilica statue, which has a shoulder width of ca. 0.55 m and stands about 1.40 m from neck to below the right knee, is slightly over life-size, so the Theater figure would have been a bit larger still, possibly ca. 2.10-2.20 m in height.72Two stun-marksfrom a heavy,blunt instrument at the right break indicate that this statue was intentionally broken. This figure was clearlyof some importance given its superhuman size, and is very likely to have represented an emperor. Cuirassedportraitsof Hadrian are found in other theaters of the eastern empire, such as at Hierapetra, Stobi, and the odeion at Troy,where they may also have occupied a central position on the facade.73Further, heads of Hadrian's portraits come from theaters at Casinum, Hierapolis, and Leptis Magna.74Statues of Hadrian are also attested by statue bases in a number of other theaters, as at Beneventum, where the base is dated to A.D. 125/6, and in the Theater of Dionysos in Athens.75A statue of Hadrian shown in heroic nudity with a shoulder mantle comes from the theater at Vasio in southern France, probablyset up ca. A.D.

121.76Moreover, a colossal statue of Hadrian in an elaborately decorated cuirass was set up

68. Rome, Conservatori Museums: Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 46, pls. 49, 51 (detail). 69. Corinth IX, ii, no. H12-3,pl. 81. Contrastfrom the Corinth Museum: S-1125, Roman gallery left, Claudian, in which the gorgon is of comparable type, but the hair is finer and more delicate, the cheeks not as exaggerated (note 66 above); S-1587 (joined with S-1661/1870/2027/2338), courtyard,late 1st centuryA.C., the gorgon much more detailed, almost florid (de Grazia 1973, no. 100); S-1081, Roman gallery right, Hadrianic,the face of which has more volume and no grimace (note 66 above); and S-2335, Athena, the gorgon small and dull. The gorgon of the MarcusAurelius from the Nymphaeum of Herodes Atticus at Olympia, set against an aegis, also lacks wispyhair (Bol 1984, pl. 21). 70. Wegner1956,pls. 19:b(VaticanMuseums,BraccioNuovo 81), 22:a (Louvre Ma 3131, from Heraklion), 22:b (Rome, Capitoline Museums,Imperatori32). 71. Rose 1994, pp. 88-93, note 73, figs. 18-21, restored in

the central niche of the second story,est. H. ca. 2.1 m. 72. CorinthIX, p. 80, no. 143; de Grazia1973, pp. 314-319, no. 103. 73. Hierapetra,Istanbul,ArchaeologicalMuseum585: Evers 1994, no. 50, with laurel wreath.Stobi:Gebhard 1981, p. 14, an Antonine emperor or member of his house, probablystood in the eastern of two niches flanking the central door. Troy: Sokolovska1981, pp. 97-98, figs. 2, 3, Hadrian with barbarian support, found 3.0 m in front of the scaenae frons and 2.0 m above the orchestralevel. 74. Evers 1994, nos. 26 (Casinum), 47 (Hierapolis), 141 (Leptis Magna). 75. Beneventum:Fuchs 1987, pp. 150, 177, no. B II 1. Athens: Pickard-Cambridge1988, p. 270; IG II2 3286, from A.D. 112, and 3287, three bases, possiblyfrom an original 12, Hadrianic. 76. Vasio, with Sabina: Fuchs 1987, p. 177; Wegner 1956, pp. 33-34, 84, 115, 130-131, pls. 12:b, 14:a,41:b, 42.

74

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

in the Odeion at Corinth.77 A depiction of Hadrian in military parade dress would be appropriate for the city's large theater and would complement other members of the imperial family group if located in the central niche on the third story of the scaenae frons, as discussed above, pp. 9-11. RELIEF WITH A PAIR OF GRIFFINS (5) 5 Relief with a pair of griffins

Pls. 11-13

5A Griffin tail directed right P1.12:a T-43.Theater, Shear's excavations,probably 1926. P.L.0.415, p.W. 0.245, Th. 0.040-0.055 m. Fourjoining fragments,preservingone corner of slab; tail broken through middle, missingsome chips. Surface heavilyweathered, yellowed, with some encrustation. P1.12:b 5B Fragmentarytail in relief T-29b.Theater, Shear'sexcavations,probably 1926. P.L.0.137,p.W.0.087,Th. 0.026,Th. withrelief0.035 m. Single fragment, segment of tail. Surfaces chipped, worn, and weathered. 5C Fragmentarywing P1.12:c T-41.Theater, Shear'sexcavations,probably 1926. P.L.0.262, p.W.0.094, Th. 0.044, Th. with relief 0.048, p.L. upper edge 0.235 m. Single fragment;broken on three sides. Wing broken through middle, chipped and weathered. 5D Relief of wing P1.12:d T-42.Theater, Shear's excavations,probably 1926. P.L. 0.310, p.W. 0.210, Th. background 0.045-0.048, Th. with relief 0.110, p.L. top edge 0.290 m. Twojoiningfragments,long feathersbrokenatbase.Missing chips from outer edge; heavilyweathered,yellowed. 5E Relief with raised left forepaw to right P1.12:e T-150/371. Theater, probably 1926. P.L.0.300, p.W.0.198, Th. background0.056, Th. with relief 0.075 m. Twojoining fragments;paw broken through base of claws and vestigial claw;missing strip of relief ground. Bibliography: CorinthIX, ii, nos. H7-3 (T-150), U59 (T-371). 5F Fragmentarybody, foreleg of griffin P1.13:a T-110/248. Theater, northeast stage building, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 488). P.L.0.360, p.W. 0.210, Th. 0.028-0.090 m. Three joining pieces; griffin body broken through midneck, middle of right foreleg, at base of left foreleg, and around shoulder to beginning of wing. Preserves beginning of some feathers. Bibliography:CorinthIX, ii, no. H6-3. 5G Relief of winged animal to left P1.13:b SS-636/637/638/958/964/T-29/29a/199/199a. 636/637/638: Theater, tr.34b, in central stage building, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 75; 56, p. 15). S-958/964: 1909 (Corinth NB 56, p. 11). T-29/29a/199/199a: 1926. 77. S-1456: CorinthX, p. 133, no. 6, figs. 118-127; de Grazia 1973, pp. 308-312, no. 101; Stemmer 1978, no. IV 11, Hadrianic.

P.L. 1.110, p.H. 0.620, Th. bottom 0.030, Th. top 0.060, p.L. top edge 0.860, p.L. right edge 0.545, max. H. relief 0.029 m. Fourteenjoining fragments; long feathers broken near base, tail at bottom of relief. Chips missing from wings, tail, edges; surfaces weathered, especially over upper half of slab. Bibliography: CorinthIX, p. 146, no. 319. 5A-G: Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous with horizontal veins; Pentelic. These seven fragments are associated due to their material, subject, scale, and technique (see P1. 11). 5A preserves a section of the upper left corner of a relief slab with part of a tail curving forward that fans out into five wispy sections at the end. The tail is modeled with a flat chisel as a beveled, flattened cylinder. The background is cut down by a fine claw chisel, applied vertically, at a diagonal, and horizontally around the tail. The block is thicker at the lower break than along the top edge. The back is smooth, with saw marks. 5B preserves a segment of a curved object that resembles the tails on 5A and 5G. A fine claw chisel or rasp is used next to the tail, as on areas of 5A. The direction of saw marks on the back indicates the horizontal. 5C, a segment from the upper edge, contains a fragmentary wing in low relief with four long feathers gradually curving right, ending flush with the edge. The line of the diagonal break at upper right indicates the line of the feathers curving into the tip. The feathers are unincised, their outer edges undulating and smoothed. The relief ground shows short claw-chisel strokes and those of a flat chisel next to the wing. The back of the slab is smooth, with saw marks. 5D depicts part of two short and six long feathers from the wing of an animal facing viewer's right. The wing tips, which curve forward, are schematically worked in low relief, but the upper edge of the animal's body, preserved along the lower break, rises to a higher relief format. The feathers are smoothed of all tool marks. The back is smooth, with saw marks. 5E provides two claws and part of the vestigial claw of the left foreleg of a griffin processing to viewer's right. An area of empty background to the right of the paw indicates that the paw did not rest on a carved object. 5F contains part of the neck, shoulders, and raised right foreleg of a griffin facing viewer's left. A base of one wing is preserved near the lower break. The neck is characterized by curved grooves, and modeling distinguishes the shoulder from the chest.

RELIEF WITH A PAIR OF GRIFFINS

5G contains a pair of narrow wings and a long, forward-curvingtail from an animal in relief facing viewer's left. The wing segments are flat and undecorated, but shorter feathers, preserved to a small extent near the lower left break,mayhave been more detailed. Although the animal was in profile, one wing is advanced so that both are visible.At the tip, each wing has a forwardcurve, echoing the circular sweep of the tail, which flares out into linear strands at the end. The slab seems to have broken along the line of the animal's projecting back. The line of the breakssuggests that the animal waswalking rather than crouching or sitting. These wings curve in the opposite direction from those of 5C and 5D, so they provide evidence of a second winged animal in mir-

75

ror image to the first.A pointed projection near the upper left edge is possibly the end of an ear, pointed forward. There is no sign of a horn, and the mane is missing. Most of the relief ground is worked with a largetoothed chisel (est. W. 0.04 m, 7 teeth) applied in short strokes (L. 0.005-0.012 m). Flat chisel marks parallel much of the tail, and finer claw or rasp marks appear between the tail's wispy ends. The back of the slab is smooth apart from a narrowoffset at the top where the saw was removed. No clamp cuttings survive,although areas missing from the upper edge may indicate the location of clamps around which the slab has broken. Hadrianic.

RECONSTRUCTION

Although this relief has been broken into many pieces, it can be reconstructed as a thin revetment plaque, or plaques, on which are represented two confronting animals (PI. 11). The fragments are presented as they would have been viewed from left to right, in Slabs A and B. Parts of two tails (5A, 5G) that curve up from the animal's rear and forward toward the head, as well as fragments of two sets of wings (5C, 5D, 5G) that curve in opposite directions, indicate the presence of two figures. One other segment (5B) adds another section of a tail. 5F provides a section of the shoulders and neck, the latter with markings that are specific to a griffin. On 5G the line formed by the breaks below the wings preserves the outline of an animal facing left, probably in a walking pose. The tip of the ear remaining on 5G gives the location of the head. The slabs are thin throughout, the relief ground varying in thickness from 0.025 m (bottom) to 0.060 m (top). 5G has parts of two edges, but there is no indication as yet of a plinth or raised ground line. If there was no projecting plinth, as in the reliefs attached to the podia of the three stories, the griffin plaques would have been clipped to backer blocks and would not have had the appearance of "standing" on a portion of the architecture. No additional figures or objects besides the two animals are indicated by the surviving fragments. On 5G the empty background between the figure and the top, right, and lower edges eliminates the possibility that the animal pulled a chariot or was the object of a hunt. A length of ca. 1.55 m for each animal and a height of ca. 0.70 m for the slab can be estimated from comparison with other Roman reliefs.78 The two animals, then, would have occupied a length of ca. 3.10 m. Since the carving of both figures on a single slab would have required a slab of exceptional length for one that is so thin, the design was probably executed on two slabs. Presumably, the layout and proportions were adjusted to fit the space required by the architectural design. Three of the fragments preserving the animals were found over the central stage building, so the plaques probably occupied a central location. There are few places where such a pair of plaques could be imagined. They could have been attached to the walls flanking the central door on the back or north face of the scaenae frons, where they would have been seen by visitors to the Peristyle Court. Stillwell has pointed out that this face has holes for iron pins or hooks to fasten marble revetment slabs.79This wall, however, could have been revetted with plain marble or with inscribed slabs, whereas the front of the scaenae frons is where a sculptural program is known to have been developed. The dimensions of the reliefs with confronting animals would fit best against the podium that is over the porta regia and under Hadrian. The interpretation of these reliefs depends upon identification of the animals, which is established as griffins, rather than sphinxes or winged lions, because of the distinctive treatment of the neck in 5F. The narrow wings are also appropriate for griffins. The two griffins may have 78. Cf. the sarcophagusfrom Patras (Athens, NM 1187) illustrated in Plate 13:c, and that in Mistra (Matz 1968-1975, I, pp. 83, 99, 100, no. 2, pl. 2:2).

79. CorinthII, p. 68; this revetted format is a finishing touch that appears to have been applied to all sides of the Peristyle Court in the 2nd-century A.C. phase of the Theater.

76

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

faced a central decorative element, now missing, such as a vase or candelabrum, recalling the griffin motif found on decorated cuirasses in reliefs from Trajan's Forum in Rome and on many Attic sarcophagi.80 A sarcophagus from Patras now in Athens (P1. 13:c) and one in St. Petersburg present griffins with similar poses and treatment of wings and tails.8' Griffins, as companions of Nemesis, are beasts of vengeance and symbolize military power, which would be an appropriate reference on the facade between two emperors. Griffins also had long been associated with Apollo and Dionysos and symbolized immortality and divinity.82If they flanked a candelabrum, thymiaterion, or torch, they may have acted as bearers of the Dionysiac or Apolline symbol of light, which would also make them appropriate decoration for the Theater.8 In this context they might be considered monumentalized versions of the griffins that form part of the throne decoration of the priest of Dionysos Eleutherios in the Theater of Dionysos in Athens.84 The theaters of Casinum, Lanuvium, and Castle Gandolfo also incorporate griffins into their decoration.85 Further, if our animals were set over the porta regia, they may have helped liken the scaenae frons to the representation of a palace facade (as suggested by Vitruvius [5.6.8]). Finally, because the griffin reliefs were placed on the facade in association with the posthumous Trajan, they may refer specifically to his military victory over the Parthians, like the griffins decorating the cuirass of the posthumous statue of Trajan in the Sackler Museum, or those on Minerva's helmet, reconstructed with the reliefs from the Lechaion Road arch at Corinth, which are associated with the period after Trajan's Parthian campaign (A.D. 113-117).86 DATE

The date of the Corinth relief is difficult to establish, with only the long feathers and tails preserved. The bodies of the figures were probably rendered with more volume, as is indicated on 5D, where the wing rises before the break, and it was probably the weight of the torso that caused the plaque to separate from the body on 5G. The schematic rendering of the wings on 5C, 5D, and 5G might suggest initially that the reliefs were carved during a different building phase than the majority of the Theater sculptures. The two-dimensional format and spacious composition, on the contrary, find parallels in reliefs from the theater at Miletos of the mid-2nd century.87The fluid treatment of the hair at the end of the tails on 5A and 5G, which contrasts sharply with the flat execution of the wings, resembles the treatment of the griffins on the sarcophagus from Patras (PI. 13:c), which is dated ca. A.D. 140-150.88

In addition,

the griffin neck on the Patras

sarcophagus provides the closest parallel to the neck of the Corinth animal, and both reliefs have a comparable amount of empty background and lack of florid detail. 80. For decorative reliefs, cf. Hamiaux 1998, nos. 324-331. Trajan'sForum, griffin relief in Paris, Louvre:Packer 1997, p. 336, no. 108, fig. 69; p. 345, no. 125, fig. 70; Kraus1967, p. 78. Relief in the VaticanMuseums:Davies 2000, fig. 24. On sarcophagi, see Matz 1968-1975, I, pp. 83, 99, 100, no. 2, pl. 2:2, in Mistra(L. 2.08, H. 0.81, Th. 0.87 m), and pp. 100101, no. 3, pl. 4:2, from Thessaloniki, now in Istanbul, both Trajanicto Hadrianic (see p. 85); pp. 103-104, no. 7, pl. 7:1, Athens, NM 1185, ca. A.D. 150; pp. 86, 104-106, no. 8, pl. 12:1, from near Paramythia,now in Ioannina, earlyyears of Marcus Aurelius. See also Herdejfirgen 1993, pp. 43-44, pls. 14-15; Rogge 1995, p. 125, no. 1, pl. 23:4, from Tarsus,now in Adana, and p. 151, no. 56, pl. 83:1, from Tyre,now in Beirut, both last quarter of 2nd century A.C.; Delplace 1980, pp. 284-292; and LIMCVIII,pp. 609-611, s.v. Gryps(Leventopoulou). 81. Athens, NM 1187: Toynbee 1934, p. 224, pl. 52:2; Koch and Sichterman1982, pp. 424, 429, 459, no. 1, ca. A.D. 140-150. St. Petersburg:Saverkina1979, no. 5, pl. 13, dated A.D. 200-210. 82. Matz 1968-1975, I, p. 100; Simon 1968, pp. 767-770; Flagge 1975, pp. 50-51, 83-93,98,116-117,125-127; Delplace 1980, p. 261. They appear on many cuirassed statues; see

Stemmer 1978, p. 153. On the meaning, see also Davies 2000, pp. 33-34, with references. 83. Madigan (1991, p. 507, note 19) calls attention to the association of griffinswith Dionysos in the theaters at Aigeira, Aigion, and Sikyon;for the mosaic with griffinsand other Dionysiacmotifs in the small temple beside the Aigeiratheater,see Salzmann 1982, p. 82, no. 1, pls. 52, 53:1, 2. 84. Richter 1966, p. 31, fig. 151, dated 1st century B.C. 85. See Fuchs1987, p. 23 (Casinum);p. 33, pi. 8 (Lanuvium); pp. 138 (pulpitum reliefs), 145 (cavea reliefs); and Hesberg 1978-1980, p. 316, fig. 14 (CastleGandolfo). 86. Trajan:Gergel 1994, p. 206, figs. 12:19, 20. Lechaion Road arch, dated ca. A.D. 117: Edwards1994, pp. 292-296, no. 25, pl.67. Edwardsfound the best parallelsfor the reliefs from this arch among sculptures from Italy (especially the arch at Beneventum) rather than from Greece or Asia Minor. 87. Miletos:Simon 1957; Kleiner 1968, pp. 70-71, figs. 44, 45, pl. 8:3;Altenh6fer and Bol 1989, pp. 32-35, pls. 2-5, 150s to early 160s. 88. Athens, NM 1187: Koch and Sichterman 1982, pp. 424, 429, 459, no. 1.

PEDIMENTAL BUSTS OF HELIOS(?),

POSEIDON(?),

AND DEMETER(?)

77

Opposing griffins are a popular motif on the backs of Attic sarcophagi of the 2nd century A.C., including examples in Mistra, Istanbul, and Ioannina.89 On a 2nd-century Dionysiac sarcophagus from Frascati and a Meleager sarcophagus in Catania of about the same period, the griffins' wings curl forward at the top in a manner somewhat similar to those here; differences in the treatments are perhaps due to differences in origin rather than in date.90 An ash altar in the Vatican Museums dated to the first half of the 2nd century displays seated griffins with analogous wing configuration.91 Roman cuirassed statues, on which confronting griffins are featured over a long period of time, are also useful comparisons. Both those with and without a central element must be considered, since the presence of a central feature cannot be assigned to the Corinth relief based on the surviving evidence. Of 42 examples cited by Stemmer from Tiberian to Severan times, a significant number, 20, are concentrated in the Trajanic period, whereas only five occur in Hadrianic times. Comparisons for our wings, which are schematic and parallel, with both wings completely visible, and with tips curved forward, are found in statues in Lugano, Leiden, and Cambridge, Massachusetts (Stemmer nos. I 10a, III 10, V 4). Stemmer dates the first two to the Trajanic period, and Trajan's head type on the Leiden piece places it in the Early Trajanic period. Moreover, Gergel has presented a convincing argument for dating the cuirassed Trajan in the Sackler Museum in Cambridge shortly after A.D. 117.92 In these examples, the schematic wings occur together with griffin bodies that are three-dimensional, which may also have been the case here. The wing tips on the Corinth relief, however, curve inward more than in the examples on cuirassed statues and the wings seem a bit more schematic.93The period in which we find the closest analogies, the Trajanic to Early Hadrianic, supports the idea that the griffin reliefs can be associated with the Hadrianic decoration of the scaenae frons. The treatment of the free background of the griffin relief is similar to that of the Corinth Theater's mythological reliefs, specifically in the way the claw chisel is used to work around an object, paralleling or running perpendicular to the object's outline, and in the way the flat chisel is applied as a smoothing tool immediately adjacent to it. In both, the rasp is generally omitted for final smoothing, and sharply chiseled lines or narrow drilled channels are not used to emphasize outlines. The smoothing around the griffin's tail and paw, for example, is quite careful. Hence, for technical reasons also it seems likely that the griffin reliefs were produced during the same building campaign and by the same workshop as the mythological reliefs. PEDIMENTAL BUSTS OF HELIOS(?), 6 Male bust, Helios(?)

P1.14

6A Right side of head P1.14:a T-169.Theater, probably 1926. P.L.0.311, p.W.0.166, max. Th. 0.225;face: p.L. 0.191, p.W. 0.068; eye: p.L. 0.024, W. 0.027, est. H. 0.025 m. Two joining fragments, right side of head; broken 89. See Wiegartz 1977. A griffin relief (S-1990-2) was discovered at Corinth, southeast of Temple E (Williams and Zervos 1991, p. 24, no. 19, pl. 6). 90. Frascati: Matz 1968-1975, III, p. 421, no. 235, suppl. pl. 111, seated griffins, dated A.D. 145-165. Catania: Koch 1975a, p. 136, no. 158, pl. 128:c, 2nd to 3rd century A.C., not Attic. Cf. also the walking griffins with analogous wing tips on sarcophagi from Trinita la cava and from near Nola: Rodenwaldt 1938, cols. 399-402, 409-414, figs. 10, 11. The griffins' wings are stylized but straight on the sarcophagus of Magnos Eryades in Ath-

POSEIDON(?),

AND DEMETER(?)

6-8

through right side of crown, right eye, right cheek. Missing surface of eyeball and chips from hair, especially along the right side. A large amount of deep red pigment (10R 4/8) is preserved in the hair, the greatest concentration over the back of the crown, where it was probably protected by an architectural member overhead. ens (NM 1185); see Matz 1968-1975, I, pp. 103-104, no. 7, pl. 7:1; and Koch and Sichtermann 1982, p. 456, ca. A.D. 160. 91. Andreae 1998, II, p. 22*, pl. 239. 92. Stemmer 1978, pp. 58-59; Gergel 1994, p. 206. 93. The griffins from the Gigantomachy from the Agora Gate at Aphrodisias, dated Antonine, show an active type of griffin, but the short wing feathers are much less schematic than those on Attic sarcophagi or the Corinth relief; see Linant de Bellefonds 1996, p. 185, for the date.

78

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

Left side of head P1. 14:b, c T-168. Theater, probably 1926. P.L. 0.343, p.W. 0.176, p.Th. 0.175, p.L. face 0.060 m. Fourjoining fragments, left side of hair, part of cheek; broken around left eye, diagonally through cheek, and through crown. Surfaces chipped and worn. Red pigment (10R 4/8) on hair over back of crown, of same hue as on other side of head. 6B

Hair fragment P1. 14:d S-667. Theater, tr. 34b, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 76). P.L. 0.120, p.W. 0.060, p.Th. 0.310 m. Single fragment; lock broken on all sides. Weathered. Red pigment (O1R 4/8) preserved. 6C

6A-C: Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. These three fragments are grouped based on similar marble, over life-size scale, and technique. 6A preserves the right edge of the face and hair from a head or bust that was worked flat at the back so as to fit into an architectural context. The forehead as preserved is short and smooth; the outer cheek lacks creases. The brow, a thin ridge with no incised hairs, is not swollen at the outer corner; the eye is shallowly set. The eye, unincised, is open wide, resting under a sharply beveled, short upper lid that extends beyond the lower at the outer corner. Short, thick, leonine locks twist to proper right and down, as if from a central part, possibly in an anastole arrangement. Farther down, the strands become longer and curve away from the face. Two thick strands wave across the right cheek, which appears beardless. Facial

surfaces retain short, light rasping; the hair is more roughly tooled; the back is worked with a point. At back there is no sign of an attachment hole or clamp, but at the lower right edge, long point markssignal the lower edge of the hair.The piece corresponds in size and rendering with 6B. 6B represents part of the left side of an over life-size head. The original head must have measured ca. 0.3340.363 m in length from crownto chin (life-size= ca. 0.225 m). The face is framedby thicklocksof wavyhair,brushed awayfrom the face, from which two strandsescape onto the cheek. The depression next to the eye and the end of the eyebrowridge are preservednear the break.There is no sign of drillworkin the hair,which is sketchilytooled with a flat chisel towardthe back; the strands are more plasticallyrendered near the face. The back surface is flat and roughly dressed with a point and a chisel, with no anathyrosis.Partsof two sides of a verticalcutting are preservedin the top of the head (p.L. 0.04; est. L. 0.06 m) to fasten it into its setting. A difference of ca. 0.01 m in height, measured from the back to comparablepoints on the outer edges of the eyes and cheeks of 6A and 6B, indicates that the right eye and cheek projectfartherfrom the backgroundthan the left, and hence that the head turned slightly to viewer's right. 6C presents a small segment of wavinglocks, similar to those of the head fragments 6A and 6B. The piece probablybelongs to the front part of the head, although it does not join. Hadrianic.

6 is characterizedas a young, vigorous figure by the thick, turbulent hair and beardless cheeks. The hair, which is composed of short, flamelike locks, could be called leonine and appears to denote a male hairstyle.Thick strandswaveforwardonto the cheeks. No signs of age or emotion are rendered on the survivingforehead or cheeks. The youth and hairstyle suggest several identifications, such as Medusa, Alexander, Apollo, and Helios. In Roman times Medusais shown with thick, turbulent hair,and locks blown forward and attached to the cheeks, as on heads at Aphrodisias, Side, and Leptis Magna. The Corinth Theater bust, however,lacksany trace of wings or snakes,and the hair does not seem long enough or sufficiently tousled or snakelike to be that of a gorgon.94 The leonine hairstyleand youth make an association with Alexander the Great appealing, as he is a figure long popular in the Greek East. He is shown with unruly hair and leonine locks, sometimes with hair trailing onto his cheeks, but frequently his portraitshave an emotional cast to the forehead and eyes that is lacking in the smooth forehead and cheeks of the Corinth bust. Some of Alexander's portraits,however, are more idealized, like the Akropolis head and Azara herm, which bear a certain resemblance to the Corinth head.95Thick hair like that of our head can be seen on some examples, as a head identified as Alexander-Helios in Rome and an over life-size bronze head in Pully,Switzerland,both of which have wisps of hair on the cheeks. In the latter two, it is primarilythe strong turn of the head on the neck and the upward tilt that distin94. Cf. LIMCIV, pp. 345-362, pls. 195-207, s.v. Gorgones Romanae(Paoletti), without facial growths;and Frothingham 1915. Aphrodisias:Jacopi 1939, no. 62, pls. II, XX. Side, the Medusa frieze from temple N 1: Mansel 1963, pp. 77-81, fig. 61. Leptis Magna:Bianchi Bandinelli et al. 1966, figs. 115-118. See also the outside of the TazzaFarnese (Bieber 1961b, fig. 411), and heads of Medusaon AsiaMinorsarcophagi(Waelkens

1982, p. 17, fig. 1, Hierapolis G1; p. 20, fig. 4, Berlin G1 from Side, ca. A.D. 120; and p. 19, fig. 5, Collection Koc Gi). 95. AkropolisMuseum1331:Bieber 1964, p. 25, fig. 5. Azara, Paris, Louvre Ma 436: Bieber 1964, pp. 27, 36, figs. 13-17; H6lscher 1971; Harrison 1960b, pp. 382-389. On problems of identification, see Smith 1988a, pp. 58-62; on Alexander'sappearance, see Stewart1993, pp. 56-70, 341-350.

PEDIMENTAL BUSTS OF HELIOS(?),

POSEIDON(?),

AND DEMETER(?)

79

guish them from our head.96In addition, although some depictions of Alexander have wisps of hair waving onto the cheeks-including some coins, the head from Alexandria in Copenhagen, the Capitoline head, and the Boston head from Ptolemais in Cyrenaica-this feature is not alwayspresent, so it cannot be diagnostic.97In the Late Antique shield portrait from Aphrodisias, in which Alexander wears a royal diadem, chlamys,and cuirassand the head faces up and to the side, the hair is arranged in thick, flamelike locks and wavesdown and back rather than blowing up and back, awayfrom the face, as on our bust.98The Corinth bust has only a slight turn and no upward tilt. If it did depict Alexander, the Corinth bust might function in part as a symbolicforerunner of the portraits of Roman emperors which stood in the aediculae of the scaenae frons. A bust of Alexander might also depict him, like the later Antinous, as a hero whose early death and subsequent fame would allow him to be associatedwith Dionysos, as a symbol of rebirth and immortality.99Further,a close relationship is sometimes seen between the iconography of Alexander and that of Helios, the hero intentionally likened to the deity.100 Although depictions of Alexander are in some cases related to those of the Genius Populi Romani, this identification does not seem likely for a bust in this context.10'Most notably, our head lacks the strong turn and upward tilt that seem characteristicof Alexander portraits.Moreover,it is important that the subjects of the three busts have a definite relevance to each other as well as to Roman Corinth. None of the possibilities examined thus far seem to coincide with the aims or character of this Italian colony and provincial capital, governed by Roman systemsof religion and law. Pediments are traditionallyassociated with deities. Besides being the place in Greek temples where stories of gods and heroes are related, it is also one location in Roman temples for depictions of deities. Further, the deceased are represented in the pediments of Roman funerary monuments to indicate their heroization.102Apollo, a Greek deity worshiped at Corinth in the Roman period and with whom Augustushad a particularaffinity,might seem a strong contender for the identity of the Corinth bust.103 Apollo is usuallyrepresented as a young, idealized figure, but although he wears various hairstyles, they do not compare closely with that of our head. On the frieze from the Portico of Tiberius at Aphrodisias of Julio-Claudian date, for instance, the heads that may represent Apollo lack flamelike locks, each following a different model. In addition, the Apollo from the Didyma capital wears his hair long and wavy,not cut in short tufts.104

Helios seems the strongest candidate for the identification here, though there are problems with this identification because of the lack of attributes. Helios is a beardless, youthful male whose primaryactivity,driving the chariot of the sun, can cause his hair to be windblown. The Hellenistic head on Rhodes, for instance, if it represents Helios, would be sufficiently close in the shape and thickness of the locks to support this identification.105 Bustsof Helios in relief at Miletos and from the Corinth Captives'Facadewear hair that is thinner, even lank, perhaps describable as a "tired"leonine. The large size and the depth required by 96. Rome, Capitoline Museums: Bieber 1964, pp. 70, 74, figs. 90,91; Helbig4,II, no. 1423. Pully (privatecollection): Berger 1971, pls. 41, 42, 43:2, from a statue ca. 2.30 m tall, ca. A.D. 200; and Inan 1978, p. 274, pl. 79:1, 2. 97. Bieber 1964, figs. 33, 44 (coins); pp. 27, 59, fig. 56 (Copenhagen head); p. 76, figs. 107, 108 (Boston head); cf. also p. 75, figs. 99, 100, the statue from Cyrene sometimes identified as Alexander, though possiblya Dioskouros or Helios. 98. Smith 1990a, pp. 135-138, no. 2, pls. 8, 9:1-3; 1996, pp. 70-71, figs. 77-78, 5th century A.C. 99. See Harrison 1960b, p. 386, for a comparison of Alexander and Antinous. 100. See Berger 1971, p. 141, note 12. 101. See Kunckel 1974, esp. pl. 21 for the heads on the Can-

celleria reliefs in Rome, VaticanMuseums. 102.Jucker 1961, figs. 30-32. 103. Lisle 1955, p. 168; Zanker1988, pp. 52-53, 68-69, 8589; Galinsky1996, pp. 213-244. On Apollo-Helios, see Bergmann 1998, pp. 123-126, 243, with references. 104.Aphrodisias:Jacopi1939, p. 103, nos. 6,7; Chaisemartin 1990, pp. 120-121, 128, 131, figs. 1, 18, 24. Didyma:Mercklin 1962,figs. 622,625. Raysand a quiversuggestan Apollo/Helios, as in the bust from Delos: LIMCII, p. 244, no. 474, s.v.Apollon (Lambrinoudakis). 105. Rhodes:Lullies and Hirmer 1960, no. 263; Fuchs 1983, fig. 697; Merker 1973, pp. 29-30, figs. 42-44; LIMCV,p. 1021, no. 172, s.v.Helios(Yalouris),with 15 holes in the hair for metal rays;Morelli 1959. See also Schauenburg 1955, pp. 38-40.

80

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

the configuration of the three busts may have caused the carver to expand the volume of the hair somewhat to be visible from the front.106 Rays, however, carved in relief or separately attached, form a regular part of Helios's imagery, especially in the Roman period-witness, for example, the bust from the Athenian Agora or the head from the Portico of Tiberius at Aphrodisias-but no holes for the attachment of rays survive in the Corinth head.107A continuous depression behind the first row of locks might conceivably have been used to affix a band holding rays or some other emblem, but there are no dowel holes to secure such an attachment, and the depression probably functions to set off the front row of locks. Conceivably, a wreath of rays could have been attached as a second piece in marble, secured behind the preserved hair, although this seems unlikely considering that the bust was probably located in an elevated position on the architecture and the detail would be largely obscured. If rays were present, they were most likely carved and painted on the block to which the head was affixed.108 Despite the lack of attribute, then, Helios is the most compelling possibility, and he is important in Roman Corinth. He has a cult on Acrocorinth (Paus. 2.4.6). He has an elaborate gilded statue that stood in a quadriga in a prominent location overlooking the Corinthian Forum-on top of the arch over the beginning of the Lechaion Road (Paus. 2.3.2). Moreover, this elaborate sculptural group was featured by the city on Roman coinage of the 2nd century.'09A location at the pinnacle of the scaenae frons seems likely and accords with the fragmentation of the piece. On the reconstruction, see below pp. 83-85. 7

Bust of Poseidon(?) P1. 14:e T-167. Theater. "VII, 1.50" is written on one segment, so it was probably found in the cavea, west of center, section VII, at 1.5 m above orchestra level, 1926. P.H. 0.276, max. W. 0.430, W. neck 0.194, p.W. worked bottom 0.394, Th. at central neck 0.135, Th. bottom 0.215; p.D. right 0.035, diam. dowel 0.010 m. Five joining fragments, preserving bases of neck and bust; broken through top of neck. Missing chips from left side and front. Right side was added as a separate piece. Traces of red paint (10R 4/6) survive along the upper right vertical edge and on the break across the top of the drapery. Marble, white, fine to medium grained. Neck and shoulders of an over life-size male bust wearing a mantle over the left shoulder. The bust format would have included most of the pectorals and the shoulders to the underarms. Modeling of the sternomastoid

shows that the head turned slightly to proper left. Three horizontal depressions in the neck suggest strength or maturity in the subject. The shoulder mantle, with three slightly twisted folds, frames the chest in heroic nudity. The bottom and rear surfaces form even planes, treated generally with a point and with some chiseling, so the piece seems designed to be used in an architectural setting. The lower resting surface curves up on both sides, unlike on 8. The upward curve at right reaches a height of 0.065 m on the front plane, but the back remains on the same horizontal as the rest. Piecing is indicated at the right shoulder by two dowel holes, but the joining surface is missing. Along the top of the left shoulder, an area not visible from a frontal or lower viewpoint, sharp chiseling has pared down the shoulder to a ridge 0.035 m from the back surface. Despite its size and probable architectural use, tool marks have been eliminated from most surfaces.

106. Milet I, vii, pp. 205, 207, figs. 215-217. CorinthI, ii, fig. 48; LIMCV, pp. 1026-1027, no. 296, s.v. Helios (Yalouris). Cf. also a limestone bust of Helios on the pediment from Oxyrhynchos in the Brooklyn Museum (Vermeule 1981, no. 170; LIMCV, p. 1026, no. 286, s.v. Helios [Yalouris], 2nd to 3rd century A.C.); a bust on an altar from Pisidian Antioch (Robinson 1926, p. 45, fig. 66); and the terracotta shield in Boston from the "Tomb of the Erotes" in Eretreia (L'Orange 1947; 1953, p. 94, fig. 66; Vermeule 1965, fig. 15). 107. Agora, S-2356: Shear 1971, pp. 273-274, pl. 58:b, Alexander with wreath or crown, mid-2nd century A.C.; LIMC V, p. 1021, no. 175, s.v. Helios (Yalouris), as identified by Thompson, with 15 holes for metal rays. Aphrodisias:Jacopi 1939, no. 60, pls. 19, 20; LIMCV, p. 1019, no. 137, s.v. Helios (Yalouris). Earlier coins render Helios without a radiate crown (see BMC, Caria, Cos, Rhodes, etc., pp. 103, 106, pl. 36:1, 3, 5-8), but rays are often a prominent feature, as in the metope from Ilium in Berlin (LIMCV, p. 1031, no. 380, s.v. Helios [Yalouris]; Webb 1996, pp. 47-51, fig. 1). Cf. also LIMCIV, pp. 592-625, s.v. Helios/

Sol (Letta), with p. 613, no. 308, the Mithraicaltar;and LIMC V, pp. 1005-1034, s.v.Helios(Yalouris). 108. Holes to attach metal wreathsexist at Corinth on portraits,such as that of Domitian (S-2272:de Grazia1973, no. 15; Ridgway1981b, p. 434) and of Poseidon in the Theater reliefs (CorinthIX, ii, no. G24-1), but in the latter, weapons are depicted both in relief and as metal attachments.Cf. the trident, swords,spears,rocks, sticks,arrows,and clubs in marble of figures from CorinthIX, ii: nos. G9-3, G14-2, G24-2, G32, G36-2, G37, G57;A2-2,A4-1,A6-1,A8,A10-3,A11-5,A12-4,A13-4,A142, A47; H1, H3-2, H4, H5-4, H6-2, H7-1, H9, H10, Hll, H13, H14-2;and holes for metal attachments:nos. G20-2,G33-1.The preference in these reliefs is for weaponry of marble. For the attachment of metal locks, cf. the Early Classical statue in Corinth S-1577 (Ridgway1977). 109. Imhoof-Blumerand Gardner [1885-1887] 1964, p. 22, nos. 97-100 (quadrigaon arch), 101-102 (Helios in quadriga), pl. F.

PEDIMENTAL BUSTS OF HELIOS(?), The neck appears wider than that which can be restored for Helios(?) (6), and is wider than that of Trajan (1), so it cannot be restored with either. Rather, it indicates an additional bust on the scaenae frons. Heavy modeling in the neck suggests a figure both powerful and

POSEIDON(?),

AND DEMETER(?)

81

mature. The size, commensurate with that of the female bust (8), indicates a location in a second-story pediment, and its findspot in relation to that of 8 supports restoration in the western pediment. Hadrianic.

This figure is portrayed as an older and more powerful figure than 6 through the wide proportions of the neck and the emphasis on the neck muscles. These features would correspond well with Poseidon, who is a major deity at Corinth in the Roman period, as is suggested by Pausanias's mention of his statues in the Forum (2.3.5; 2.2.7) and the major temple and dedications to him in his sanctuary on the Isthmos (2.1.6-9; 2.2.1-3).110 Moreover, the identity of the shoulder bust should be related to the two companion busts (6, 8) in terms of Roman cults at Corinth. The form of this bust, a figure presented in heroic nudity and wearing a shoulder mantle, is derived from one of two statuary types used for Poseidon that begin in the 4th century B.C. and are repeated or adapted in Hellenistic and Roman times. The best known is the Late Hellenistic Poseidon from Melos in Athens, a standing figure that wears a mantle wrapped about the hips and brought up over the left shoulder, his right arm raised to lean on a trident. The second is the Poseidon from Corinth in Madrid, who is nude except for the mantle that rests on his left shoulder and hangs beside him. Both wear heavy beards and have large dolphins acting as statue supports at their right."' They are probably reflections of a standing Poseidon of the Classical period that stood at Corinth or Isthmia. The Madrid figure is possibly related in type to the marble sculpture that was set up in the cella of the Temple of Poseidon at Isthmia in the Late Hadrianic to Early Antonine period and is itself probably of Antonine date. The Theater bust, therefore, cannot reflect either the Isthmia or the Madrid figure, but must follow a local tradition known through other examples.112 Elsewhere, statues of Poseidon were also adapted for architectural use as busts. A Poseidon was applied to the console of the attic frieze on a triumphal arch in Pisidian Antioch, now in Afyon. A series of eight medallion busts from Roman Aquileia deriving from a monumental public building, possibly an arch, of the mid-2nd century, includes a bearded male figure with shoulder mantle, but no attribute, identified asJupiter. The bust has a similar configuration to ours as far as one can tell, though it lacks the emphasis on the strong neck."13For figures in low relief, identification is generally made certain by addition of a triton, and one may have been added to the block behind the Corinth bust or in the attachment at left. As the Corinth busts are worked nearly in the round, objects that serve as attributes would have to be added separately. The identification here is conjectural, but the iconographic parallels cited make it plausible. Pls. 15, 16 Bust of Demeter(?) S-583/3584. Theater. S-583, left shoulder: tr. 34b, over central stage, 1903. S-3584, right shoulder: east end of stage building, behind east hospitalium, 3.5 m above the floor of the stage, and at about the same level as the top of the second course of the hospitalium exedra, 1928 (Corinth NB 321, p. 513, plan p. 511 at la); identified by drawing of lower right fragment. 8

110. For sculptural dedications at Isthmia, see IsthmiaIV and VI. 111. Athens, NM 235: LIMCVII, p. 452, no. 32, s.v. Poseidon (Simon); Schafer 1968, pp. 55-58. Madrid, Prado 13, on the art market in 1764: Isthmia IV, p. 93, pl. 84:3; Geagan 1989; LIMCVII, p. 452, no. 31, s.v. Poseidon (Simon), Hadrianic; inscription on dolphin, IG XIV 2543; Klockner 1997, pp. 261262, GS3, H. 2.36 m. 112. For discussion of the Isthmia figure and possible related types, see Sturgeon in Isthmia IV, pp. 92-94. Cf. also Roman adaptations in LIMCVII, s.v. Poseidon/Neptunus (Simon), esp. p. 485, nos. 6-9, for standing types with shoulder mantle

H. 0.655, max. W. bust 0.575, Th. at nose 0.270, H. head 0.379, H. face 0.273, W. neck 0.158, est. W. face 0.22, H. eye 0.020 m. Four joining pieces, head and bust; missing upper right segment of head, right side of cheek, chin, bust. Missing chips from drapery and hair at left and from front; strong weathering, much of which is modern. Bibliography:S-583: CorinthX, p. 66, no. 114 (no photo). arrangement, which continue to use the large dolphin support. 113. Afyon Museum 338: LIMCVII, p. 453, no. 44, s.v. Poseidon (Simon), dated Augustan; Robinson 1926, pp. 26-27, figs. 31, 38-39. Aquileia: LIMC VIII, p. 443, no. 261, s.v. Zeus/Iuppiter (Canciani); Scrinari 1972, pp. 195-196, no. 606. Other bust figures identified as Zeus may also have a full beard and shoulder mantle, and identifications are similarly conjectural, as LIMC VIII, nos. 40 (Getty), 151 (Copenhagen), s.v. Zeus/Iuppiter (Canciani), though in two cases the thunderbolt is either at left (no. 162, Vienna) or on the medallion rim (no. 260, Rimini, Arch of Augustus).

82

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

Marble, white, fine to medium grained; Pentelic. Preserved is an over life-size female bust of idealized type. The figure wears a garment with light, vertical folds and a mantle pulled over the head and resting over the shoulders. The head is turned slightly to proper left; the bust would have extended to the breasts. The shoulders are not clearly indicated (unless the mantle is meant to cover them), but they are narrow in relation to the head and strongly sloping. The face presents a triangular forehead, an evenly rounded contour, and smooth, broad cheeks, suggesting an idealized type, as opposed to a portrait. The eyes are wide open, the eyeball rounds outward considerably and the upper part projects 0.01 m beyond the lower; the inner corners are strongly offset. The lips are slightly parted, and the lower lip is fuller than the upper. The hair, flat and schematic, is parted in the center and pulled back, leaving the ear lobes visible. Two locks hang for-

ward on each side, reaching the top of the garment; single holes pierce their tightly curled ends at left. A hole in the left earlobe held a metal earring.14 No traces of paint can be detected. Part of a large cutting to secure the figure to its setting is preserved in the upper rear surface (L. 0.075 m). A corresponding cutting may have existed in the lower back, but this area is missing. The probable line of these cuttings coincides with the line of the central break. The piece is smoothly dressed with a point on top, back, and bottom, as if designed to rest in an architectural location. There is no evidence for a frame or medallion on the sides as preserved. The dimensions and the findspot, some distance above the floor of the stage building, seem commensurate with a location in the east pediment of the second story of the scene building. Hadrianic.

The figure 8 is clearly portrayed as a classicizing type. The calm appearance and minimal plasticity contrast with the thicker hair and rougher or wilder appearance of the male bust (6). Since attributes are again lacking, the identification is problematic and various possibilities should be considered from among deities, such as Hera, Kybele, or Demeter, all of whom appear veiled. Hera is generally depicted as matronly, and she frequently is shown with a veil making the gesture of anakalypsis,which aids identification. She also may wear a diadem or crown, which are lacking here."5 Kybele is another mature goddess who wears a chiton and sometimes a mantle or long veil over the head, with locks reaching the shoulders. Although she often wears a mural crown under the veil, she also appears without it, as on a relief in Paris from Alasehir and a terracotta relief in St. Petersburg from near Smyrna.116The presence of lions or a tympanum normally indicates her identity, and the inclusion of both is possible with the bust form, as on an altar from Afyon.117Alternatively, it might have been possible to specify identifications through inscriptions or dipinti on the architectural member below the busts, as has been shown for the friezes of the Siphnian Treasury at Delphi."8 With the Theater busts, however, the figures would be seen from a much greater distance, so reliance on a written message would be ineffective. A compelling case cannot be made for either Hera or Kybele. Demeter appears to be the most likely subject for the matronly bust. The features of this head-a triangular forehead that is rounded in section, and the full cheeks and chin-reflect generally the style of the 4th century B.C. These features are seen, in combination with a veiled head and long locks over the shoulders, on the Demeter of Knidos of ca. 340 B.c.119A number of Roman depictions of Demeter and Ceres, as on a cinerary urn in Rome and a relief in Copenhagen, also have a veiled head and hanging locks.120Further, a votive relief from Athens of the 2nd century A.C. represents Demeter with a plain, unmodeled face similar to that of the Corinth bust.121 The bland expression of the bust may be in part a factor of the date, and in part of the 114. For a similar arrangement and drilling of the locks, compare the seated Kybele at Corinth, S-855 (Corinth IX, no. 55; Isthmia IV, pl. 84:d). 115. Cf. LIMCIV, pp. 659-719, s.v. Hera (Kossatz-Deissmann); identification often uncertain unless together with Zeus, as on Parthenon, east frieze (p. 684, no. 208). See, e.g., staters from Argos and Knossos (Simon 1969, p. 54, figs. 46, 47); also a head sometimes identified as Hera in Boston (EAA III, p. 1147, fig. 1465, s.v. Hera [Homann-Wedeking]; Comstock and Vermeule 1976, no. 47). 116. E.g., Vermaseren CCCAI, nos. 94,95,96, 225,247 (with crowns); 487 (Alasehir); 570 (St. Petersburg). LIMCVIII, pp. 744-766, s.v. Kybele (Simon); Kybele sometimes wears a veil

over a polos, or more rarelyjust a veil, as on the "Naiskos Sabouroff"in the Hermitage (p. 755, no. 61), where the identity is established by symbolson the relief. 117. Naumann 1983, p. 288, pl. 49:3. 118. Brinkmann 1985. 119. London, BM 1300: Fuchs 1983, fig. 298. 120. Rome, Museo Nazionale 11301: LIMCIV, p. 902, no. 144, s.v. Demeter/Ceres (de Angeli); Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 1480: LIMC IV, p. 896, no. 48, s.v. Demeter/Ceres(de Angeli). On depictions of Demeter/Ceres, see also Spaeth 1996, pp. 7-8, 127-134. 121. Found north of the Olympieion: Harrison 2000, p. 275,

fig. 10.

PEDIMENTAL BUSTS OF HELIOS(?),

POSEIDON(?),

AND DEMETER(?)

83

large size, for other Roman classical-styleheads on this scale have unmodeled faces with a blank expression.122 Another Roman aspect is the treatment of the chiton, which is composed of verticalfolds that form a scalloped upper border. This format recalls the arrangement of the buttoned tunic worn by some portraitsof the early 2nd century A.C., such as a portraitbust in the Capitoline Museums of ca. A.D. 100-110, although the treatment of the Corinth drapery is more plastic.123Vertical folds are also emphasized on a bust of Ceres from Ariccia, which shares with the Corinth figure a somewhat off-shoulderarrangement of the chiton and long shoulder locks.124 The colossal bust of Isis/Sothis/Demeter from the Serapeum in Hadrian'sVilla at Tivoli has a similar configuration of vertical folds in the chiton, diminished shoulders, and veiled head.125Moreover,the eyes are similarly shaped and they, e with the rest of the upper head, project farther than the lower portion-also a feature of the Corinth bust. Grenier points out that the veil is one of the attributes of Demeter as a chthonic deity.126 Finally,Demeter has an important cult at Corinth which is active through the Roman period. In parts of the Peloponnese she is thought of as the wife of Poseidon, as at Thelpusa, Phigalia, and Lykosoura (Paus. 8.27.6).127At Lykosoura,as early as the Hellenistic period this divinity is shown with the classicizingfacial type and hairstyle,as well as the veiled head and long locks that have been adopted here.128Moreover,if the two other busts from the Theater represent Helios and Poseidon, Demeter would make good sense as the third, since each bust would then refer to a specific cult site in the area. RECONSTRUCTION (6-8)

The three busts also formed part of the architecturaldecoration of the Theater.The busts are of similar marble, and the two preserved at the base, 7 and 8, appear to correspond in both scale and length. The height of the better-preserved,female bust 8, 0.655 m, is commensurate with the estimated height of the male bust 7, ca. 0.66 m. The maximum width of 8, 0.575 m, is larger than that of 7, 0.430 m, which, however, lacks an attachment at right, whereas the estimated width of the male head, 6A and B, is only 0.50 m. The estimated width of the face of 6 is 0.218 m at eye level (0.24 m below the escaping strands), while the estimated width of the face of 8 is 0.22 m. The estimated length of the head of 6 is 0.365 m to the chin, the actual length of 8 is 0.379 m. The "Triton"head (10), on the other hand, is on a considerablylarger scale (W.face 0.391, est. H. eye 0.025 m), suitable to a different location on the architecture. It seems likely, therefore, that the three busts designated as 6, 7, and 8 were placed in coordinate positions in the Theater. The findspot of the male shoulder bust 7 in the west half of the orchestra to stage area suggests that it was set up in the west half of the stage building facing the center. The female head 8, which like 7 has a slight turn towardproper left, viewer'sright, wasfound near the east end of the stage building, behind the east door, 3.5 m above the floor of the stage. The elevation at which the female bust was found indicates that it fell from a higher level, so the busts may have been 122. Cf. the head of Athena from the Pnyx, Athens, NM 3718 (Karouzou 1968, pp. 65-66, Antonine, H. 0.70 m); the head of the colossal seated Minerva,Rome, Museo Nazionale I, 1, pp. 127-128, no. 91, post-Trajanic);and the (MusNazRom, head of Africa in the Villa Albani (Bol 1989-1998, V, pp. 233236, no. 719, dated Antonine, H. 0.545 m). On Roman colossal heads, see also Megow 1994. 123.Jucker 1961, p. 71, St 8, pl. 23. 124. Spaeth 1996, fig. 2. 125. Vatican Museums, Museo Gregoriano Egizio 22804: Amelung VatKat,I, pp. 675-676; Raeder 1983, p. 117, no. I/ 139; Grenier 1989, esp. pp. 957-958, 960-965. 126. Grenier 1989, p. 958. There is no cutting in the top of the Corinth bust for an attribute,as there is in the Tivoli bust

(see Grenier 1989, pl. 28), so there is no indication that Isis is the subject. 127. On Demeter'srelationshipto Poseidon, see, e.g., LIMC IV, p. 845, s.v. Demeter(Beschi); a seated Demeter is possibly depicted with a standing Poseidon on a circularlimestone relief from the Athenian Agora, S-1194 (LIMCIV,p. 82, no. 460, s.v. Demeter[Beschi]); and cf. the seated Poseidon with standing Demeter from the Roman forum at Smyrna(Akurgal1978, pp. 121-123, pls. 49-51). 128. Lykosoura: LIMC IV, p. 880, no. 436, s.v. Demeter

(Beschi). See also, e.g., Peschlow-Bindokat1972; LIMCIV,pp. 844-892, s.v. Demeter(Beschi), and pp. 893-908, s.v. Demeter/ Ceres(de Angeli).

84

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

positioned above the first story of the scaenae frons. Their horizontal findspots point to original positions to the left and the right of the central door. The restored pediments on the second story of the facade correspond in measurements by scale (H. 0.90, W. 3.0 m) to those of the busts 7 and 8. The pediment of the third story, which is only slightly smaller, corresponds in size to the remaining head, 6. 6A and 6B have no specific provenance, but 6C was found in 1903 over the central stage, which would correlate with a location in the central pediment. Given their analogous locations on the architecture, as conjectured, it seems likely that the busts are thematically related. The identification of each is tentative, since no trace of their attributes survives. As a group, the three busts provide important parameters for the self-identification of Corinth. At Corinth Helios has close associations with Aphrodite, the city's tutelary deity: witness his original possession of Acrocorinth (Paus. 2.4.6) and the appearance of his statue with those of the Armed Aphrodite and Eros on Acrocorinth (Paus. 2.5.1). Demeter, the preeminent agrarian deity, has an important cult site on the slopes of Acrocorinth, and Poseidon has his on the Isthmos of Corinth.129 Their images may serve the combined functions of propitiating the deities for their good care and crediting them with Corinth's favorable position in agricultural production and seafaring trade. Their location in the pediments, where deities are frequently depicted, may also connote epiphany. The execution of the busts is notably lacking in deep drillwork or undercutting of the sort that might be expected in figures on this scale or placed at some height. The rendering of the hair is to some extent distinct among the three, but this appears to result from different characterizations rather than from basic differences in technical approach. In fact, the kinds of variation seen here can be paralleled in the Theater reliefs. The sketchy rendering of the female's chiton in 8, for instance, is like that of Artemis's hair (G30-1). The linear hair framing her face and her wide-open, bulging eyes are similar to those of the Amazon head A6-2 and of Medusa on Herakles' shield (H12-3). The forehead hair of the female bust is flatter and more schematic than most frieze figures, possibly because of its greater size and the fact that only the front portion would have been seen. The face and hair seem treated with an academic classicism; in fact, the way the hair is pulled back from the face may be influenced by the hairstyle of the young empress Sabina, as seen on a portrait in Rome, although it is rendered here with what might be characterized as post-Trajanic linearity.130In addition, the plasticity and vertical emphasis in the chiton seem well in accord with a Hadrianic date, as comparison with the colossal bust of Isis/Sothis/Demeter from Tivoli suggests.'3l The length of the Theater busts also corresponds with the length of portrait busts in the Hadrianic period.132 The Captives' Facade figures at Corinth, ca. mid-2nd century A.C., offer considerable contrast to the Theater busts in rendering, for their hair and drapery are much thicker and more strongly undercut, with an obvious, heavier use of the drill.' 33The eyes also differ: on the Demeter(?) bust, the upper lid is not as wide and not of even width all across, as is the case on the Facade figures. Furthermore, on the Demeter bust the eyes are open wider, and the eyeballs bulge outward and curve back into the face, rather than lying flat in the frontal plane. The style of the Theater busts, on the other hand, seems comparable with that of the Silenos piers (11, 12) and the Theater reliefs. Like the Helios(?) (6), the hair of the silenoi reveals a lack of drillwork and undercutting. The facial features of the silenoi, on the other hand, are more dramatically rendered, as appropriate to the subject. In addition, the shoulder mantle of the 129. On Demeter at Corinth, see Bookidis and Stroud in CorinthXVIII, iii, pp. 1-8 on sources; also Hommel 1954, p. 82, note 172. On the Isthmian sanctuary, see Isthmia I and II. 130. Rome, Museo Nazionale 1222: Felletti Maj 1953, no. 195; Carandini 1969, p. 180, no. 42, figs. 206-207; p. 178, fig. 199, pl. 15:liii. Compare also the female head in NewYork, MMA 10.210.22: Fittschen and Zanker 1983, suppl. pl. 18:a, note the hair over the right temple. 131. Vatican Museums, Museo Gregoriano Egizio 22804:

Raeder 1983, p. 117, no. I/139. Compare also the nonpertinent bust of Faustina the Elder, Rome, Conservatori Museums, Ingresso, inv. 994. This drapery rendering is common in Early Hadrianic times and later; see Fittschen and Zanker 1983, p. 15, no. 14, pl. 18, and pp. 75-76, no. 99, pl. 125 (Conservatori Museums, Galleria 73, inv. 956). 132. Fittschen and Zanker 1985, p. 45, cf. nos. 42 and 46. 133. See Corinth IX, nos. 217-222; and above, p. 37, note 68.

HIGH-RELIEF HEADS OF NEREID (OR APHRODITE)

Poseidon(?)

AND TRITON

85

(7) is similar in style to that worn by a portrait from Carthage of Hadrian in the

guise of Diomedes.134Both the forms and technique of these three busts appear to correspond with other sculptures associated with the Hadrianic period and with the Corinth scaenae frons. HIGH-RELIEF HEADS OF NEREID (OR APHRODITE) Relief of Nereid (or Aphrodite) P1. 17 S-431. Theater, tr. 34, 1902 (Corinth NB 56, p. 73, where Dinsmoor notes other fragments still in the trench; 112C, p. 127, drawing). P.H. 0.445, p.W. 0.687, p.Th. 0.315, W. cutting for head 0.328, est. W. neck 0.215, W. frame at right 0.124, Th. background 0.230, original Th. at left side of hair 0.285 m. Threejoining pieces; broken all around, missing most of face and most of back of slab. Numerous small chips. Bibliography: Corinth IX, p. 107, no. 228 (unillustrated), where called Medusa; Richardson 1902, p. 22. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. Part of hair, neck, and flanking drapery from a highrelief head on the same colossal scale as Triton (10). Heavy point marks cover most of the facial cavity, with fine claw-chisel work extending to about 0.01 m from the rim. Although this treatment might suggest that the face was chiseled out for a subsequent use, the presence of anathyrosis on the walls of the cavity suggests that the head was originally inserted, and the back of the block has probably broken along the lines of the attachment clamp. The head may have been inserted as part of a repair. The cheeks project to varying degrees before the surface breaks off. The figure is depicted from the base of the neck upward. The neck itself is slightly modulated and in low relief. Long, wavy locks hang vertically on both sides in an arrangement much more regular than that of O1E.These are single locks and the remaining hair is likely pulled back. Visible beside and behind the hair is a mantle that was worn around the head, as if to provide an encircling frame. The segment at proper right hangs in vertical folds, while at left, the corner of a mantle is depicted with V-shaped folds above, as though the material is bunched together. With this arrangement of folds, the corner of drapery could only extend to the level of the neck if it were raised above the figure by the left hand. The somewhat higher projection of the right surfaces of the head and the compressed, thicker drapery at left suggest that the head turned slightly toward proper left. This figure, then, presents a calm, contrasting pendant to 10, which is turned in the opposite direction. A medallion frame curves continuously around the lower edge of the block, narrow in the center and wider toward the sides. The frame, worked with a claw chisel, is relatively flat near the drapery, but gradually curved near the outer edge. No border survives on 10E, although fragments depicting similar flying hair against a frame on O1C and O1D may be associated with it. The degree of the curve of 9 is similar to that on other fragments associated with 10E on the basis of their flying hair 9

134. In Tunis: Niemeyer 1968, no. 101, pl. 37:1.

AND TRITON (9-10)

(10G,10I). The frame is set back behind the neck and drapery 0.025 m at the center, 0.085 m at viewer's right, and not at all at left. The drapery and hair project in higher relief at right, and the line of the face's break at upper left shows again that the head was turned to proper left. If this relief was set into the scaenae frons, it would most likely have been located at left, so as to face the center. The lower edge of the block has a setback or rebate measuring from 0.035 m at left to 0.065 m deep at right, behind which the block is sawn. Part of the original rear surface with claw-chisel tooling is preserved. The front part of a clamp cutting, p.L. 0.085 m, is preserved at the lower right break. Hadrianic. 10

Relief of Triton

Pls. 18-20

O1A Dolphin swimming through P1. 19:a wavelike hair S-639a/642. Theater, tr. 34b, 1903. P.L. 0.230, p.W. 0.106, p.Th. 0.064 m. Threejoining fragments; broken all around and from the figure at back. The dolphin missing chips from nose, dorsal fin, and tail; surfaces weathered. Bibliography: S-639a: CorinthIX, p. 54, no. 67. S-642: CorinthIX, ii, p. 51, no. G11l. P1. 19:b 10B Large hair segment with dolphin tail S-3594/T-270a. S-3594: Museum basement marble pile, probably Shear's excavations, 1926. T-270a: Theater, probably 1926. P.L. 0.451, p.W. 0.244, p.Th. 0.122 m. Fourjoining fragments; broken to left of central part in hair and on both sides of hair framing upper right side of face. Missing chips from locks; outer surfaces worn. Bibliography: T-270a: CorinthIX, ii, p. 51, no. G110. P1. 19:c 10C Hair on medallion rim S-943/944. Theater, tr. 34a or b, north extension, 1909 (from Corinth Sculpture Inventory NB). P.L. 0.200, p.Th. 0.100, p.L. hair 0.130, p.L. frame 0.150, W. frame 0.080 m. Two joining fragments; broken all around. Chipped, worn, frame heavily weathered. P1. 19:d 10D Hair on medallion rim S-640/941/942. Theater, tr. 34b, 1903/1909 (from Corinth Sculpture Inventory NB). P.L. 0.335, p.W. 0.174, p.Th. 0.082, W. frame 0.074 m. Three joining fragments; broken all around. Missing chips from rim and hair.

86

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

Pls. 18:b, 20 10E Lower face S-3550/641/T-270. S-3550, head: Theater, tr. 34a or b, early excavations, probably 1902 or 1903. S-641, dolphin body: central stage building, 1903. T-270, dolphin head: Shear's excavations, probably 1926 (Corinth NB 112C, p. 127, drawing).Joined 1998. P.H. 0.502, p.W. 0.744, max. Th. (with face) 0.431, L. from center mouth to bottom of chin 0.153, p.W. face 0.391, D. face 0.205, Th. background 0.225, Th. at hair 0.280; dolphin head: p.L. 0.120, W. 0.051; est. H. 0.80 m. Three joining fragments, head broken horizontally through center of face, around edge of left cheek; missing left side of neck, lips, large chip from chin, ends of vegetal growths on lower cheeks and neck. Dolphin's head missing chips from snout and back of head. Lower side of block not preserved. Bibliography: S-3550: Ridgway 1981b, p. 445, with wrong inventory number, dated Severan, identified as Skylla (with fins or seaweed), and discussed as evidence for contacts with Leptis Magna (Severan Forum). S-641: CorinthIX, ii, p. 49, no. G98, pl. 37. T-270: CorinthIX, ii, p. 50, no. G109. P1. 19:e 10F Nose S-421. Theater, tr. 34a, central stage building, 1902 (Corinth NB 13, p. 33; 56, p. 67). P.L. 0.170, p.W. 0.162, p.Th. 0.078, W. nose at base 0.097, W. nose at bridge 0.052 m. Two joining fragments; broken across base of nose, through lower right eyelid, cheek, and upper lip. Lower half of nose heavily weathered. Bibliography: CorinthIX, pp. 107-108, no. 229. Ridgway 1981b, p. 445. P1. 19:f 10G Hair on medallion rim S-3603. Museum basement marble pile, probably from Shear's excavations. P.L. 0.180, p.W. 0.111, p.Th. 0.092; frame: p.L. 0.063, W. 0.055 m. Single fragment; broken all around. Surface chipped and worn. 10H Hair and left side of face P1. 19:g S-3595. Museum basement marble pile, probably from Shear's excavations. P.L. 0.160, p.W. 0.171, p.Th. 0.083 m. Single fragment; broken all around. Outer surfaces chipped and worn. P1. 19:h 10I Hair on medallion rim S-3602. Museum basement marble pile, probably from Shear's excavations. P.L. 0.128, p.W. 0.127, p.Th. 0.046 ; frame: p.L. 0.070, Th. 0.060 m. Single fragment; broken all around. Surface chipped, worn, weathered. P1. 19:i 10J Dolphin body S-957. Theater, tr. 34a, north extension, 1910. P.L. 0.155, W. 0.079, Th. 0.059 m.

Single fragment;broken at twoends. Surfacechipped, worn, with some encrustation. 10K Dolphin body P1.19:j S-666. Theater, tr. 34b, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 76).

P.L. 0.100, W. 0.068, Th. 0.044 m. Single fragment; broken on three sides. Chipped and worn. Bibliography: CorinthIX, ii, p. 51, no. G113, pl. 38. 10A-K: Marble, white, fine grained and sparkly;with dark gray streaks (micaceous?); Pentelic. These 11 pieces are grouped on the basis of their similarity of scale, marble, and form. 10A contains a dolphin swimming through two large, loosely waving locks of a head much over life-size. Two upward-curving, smaller curls twist around a larger, downward-hanging lock. The hair resembles that of 10E. The dolphin is rendered with greater detail on the proper right, so it would have been positioned swimming to the viewer's right, with the head in three-quarter right view, the nose probably pointing downward. The piece possiblyjoins onto the upper right of 10B, which would place it over the head's upper (proper) left forehead. 10B consists of a large portion of long, wavy hair from the upper right side of a colossal head. No skin surfaces survive, but the central part in the hair indicates the orientation of the head. The small segment inventoried from Shear's excavations attests to its provenance in the Theater, while the character of the locks-thick, twisting, and broadly carved with a flat chisel-corresponds closely to the hair of 10E. Over the wavelike hair at the figure's right rides the tail of a fish coursing downward. A small dowel hole and rough tooling at the lower right reveal the point of attachment, possibly from a repair, of the fish's head. The fish allows for possible identification of the associated high-relief head as Triton, Skylla, or a fishgoddess, but probably not Medusa (see pp. 88-90). 10C is part of a medallion rim with ends of long, curving locks extending onto it. The piece curves outward on the outer edge of the frame just before the break. This is part of the same frame as that shown in 10D, 10G, and 10, and may belong with 10E. 10D has part of the rim from a medallion frame with the pointed ends of locks on colossal scale curving onto it. The degree of curve shows that the diameter of the medallion is somewhat greater than 0.60 m. The locks here end in wisps on the frame, like the flatter locks near the upper right of 10C, and are similar to those on 10G and 10I. The medallion border is dressed with a claw chisel. Beneath the lower edge of the frame, two large point marks survive from the intentional breaking up of the architecture. 10E preserves the lower portion of a colossal beardless head and neck projecting in high relief from a thick architectural block. The high-relief head, turned slightly toward proper right, is conceived as Triton emerging from the sea, with watery seaweed clinging to his face and neck and with dolphins coursing downward through his hair. The differentiation of the cheeks, with the left cheek displaying a more gradual, the right, a tighter curve, and the mouth placed to proper right of center, indicate that the head faced proper right, to viewer's left.

Seaweed is shown as two downward-pointinggrowthsin low relief on the right midcheek, with the base of another,wider growthat lower right, and the base of a similar and twosmallergrowthson the lowerleft cheek. Stubs of two shorter bits of seaweed or barnaclesemerge from

HIGH-RELIEF HEADS OF NEREID (OR APHRODITE) the right side of the neck, one below the other. An additional, irregular piece of seaweed crosses the neck, pointing down at center. The large nose (10F), with its scaly decoration, probably goes with this piece also, as the seaweed on the nose is stylized in the same manner as that projecting from the cheek here. The relief includes a small segment of the upper right shoulder, with the sternomastoid muscle modeled near the presumed center of the neck. Within the long locks swinging away from the face are two large struts that support the long, narrow body and head of a dolphin, cavorting downward through the hair. The upper dolphin body in 10E curves in two directions, effectively reproducing a fishlike swimming movement. Its skin is textured with lengthwise striations achieved by a narrow, round-ended chisel.'35 Although the outer edge of the strut below is considerably worn, thejoin between the dolphin's head and this strut is certain, for the lengthwise striations and outer surfaces match line for line on the two segments. As restored, the dolphin's head projects 0.167 m from the background plane and it is brought into the front plane of Triton's face, making it legible. The use of a large strut to support curved projecting elements has much in common with architectural forms, such as the projecting volutes of Corinthian capitals, emphasizing a feature that is particular to architectural sculpture. On the dolphin's head, both eyes are distinctly rendered, though the fin is carved only at right. The dolphin swims downward with head turned out in threequarter view. This position corresponds with the greater carved detail at right, where a small, round-ended chisel imparted texture. Unlike its companion (9), 10E preserves no traces of drapery around the perimeter. Not enough of the sides survive on this segment to determine whether the corners rounded upward as on 9 or to discern a medallion frame. Fragments 10C, 10D, 10G, and 10I, however, which preserve portions of a wide medallion with hair from a colossal figure, may be associated with 10E on analogy with the curved frame for 9. The head turns slightly toward proper right, forming a symmetrical arRECONSTRUCTION

(9,

AND TRITON

87

rangement with 9. Because of the seaweed and dolphins, the figure most likely represents Triton.136 The piece is not carved with a raised plinth, but would have rested directly on the block below. The back of the slab is dressed with a heavy point. 1OFdepicts the nose and part of the right cheek from a colossal figure. Raised in relief on the nose are two rows of three downward-pointing elements, each with a raised recessed segment. These stylized points suggest seaweed, water, or vegetation, as displayed by Triton, Medusa, Skylla, and Atargatis (see discussion below, pp. 88-90). The surviving cheek is smooth, with no modeling. The upper surface of the lower eyelid, which is raised 0.013 m, is slightly tilted and flat; its outer surface is uncreased. Two horizontal grooves crossing the nose above the tip suggest a male rather than a female figure. The nostrils are deeply cut. A small segment of the upper lip (L. 0.017 m) survives near the lower break. No rasp marks remain, although the surface is somewhat bumpy from shaping with a flat chisel. lOG contains a segment of hair from a colossal head in relief. The ends of two thick, twisting strands diminish in volume, forming shallow points toward the tips. The adjacent plane, set at a slightly greater than right angle and tooled with a claw chisel, probably represents a curving medallion rim, as on 9 and 101. The hair is similar to the hair of 10E. 10H contains large, twisting locks of hair that curve down and around a portion of skin at the lower left, probably the side of the face. Individual strands are broadly chiseled; wider channels separate or undercut projecting locks. The piece corresponds closely to 10E. 101 depicts hair in relief. Ends of thick strands terminate in wisps against the background. The adjacent plane, at a slightly greater than right angle, is roughly tooled with a claw chisel and probably forms the rim of a medallion, as the tooling is similar to that on the medallion of 9. Parts of two bodies (10J, OK),which are completely separated from the relief ground, remain from two of the dolphins. An additional lock of hair is uncatalogued (S-972). Hadrianic.

10)

Two high-relief heads on colossal scale (9, 10) also formed part of the architecturaldecoration of the scaenae frons. Neither block preserves its original height or width. The greatest width preserved is 0.763 m, the greatest height 0.545 m, both on 10, of which the thickness of the background slab is 0.230 to 0.250 m; the maximum height of the relief is 0.206 m. The height of 10

can be estimated at ca. 0.80 m. Although less well preserved, the head of 9 appears to be of similar scale and rises from a block of similar dimensions (max. p.W. 0.687, p.H. 0.445, Th. background 0.230 m), so there seems little doubt that the two formed a pair. 135. T-273 (Corinth IX, ii, p. 49, no. G101, pl. 37) resembles the dolphin body S-641 (part of 10E) in shape, but the tooling with a scratchy rasp and the mode of separation on the inner side suggests that it is more likely to be part of a serpent coil. 136. Dolphins appear at Corinth and Isthmia in varied contexts: as supports for statues of varying sizes (the identity as a dolphin is not always certain), in decorative reliefs on architectural revetments, as supports for sleeping Erotes, and as supports for a bench beside the bema.

In marble sculpture, cf. S-31, dolphin tail, medium-sized, pieced; S-183, boy on dolphin, support for large statue (Corinth IX, p. 98, no. 205); S-212, fr., medium-large; S-316, on Poseidon fountain (CorinthIX, p. 98, no. 204); S-760, boy on two dolphins (Corinth IX, p. 55, no. 72); S-2246, very small fish tail; S-2429, relief fr. dolphin with Eros; S-2434, dolphin head with dowel hole from small support; and S-2592, dolphin head in relief, drapery over the side of face. Isthmia also favors dolphins, in small bronzes, marble sculpture, and as impressions on rooftiles.

88

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

On 9 there is clear indication of a medallion, which provided a curved border for the head. No trace of a medallion is preserved on the lower part of 10 (1OE), although some sort of frame

seems likely and can be positioned just beyond the preserved edge of the hair on the evidence of a number of associated fragments (10C, 10D, 10G, 10I). The excavation records provide only general information regarding the findspots of parts of

these high-relief heads, but even these general indications are useful. The Nereid head (9) and parts of the Triton (10E, 10F) were found in 1902 in trench 34, the large trench crossing the

central stage building, while 10A and 1OKwere discovered in 1903, 1D in 1903 and 1909, and 10J in 1910 in an extension north of the stage building (see Plan I). From the findspots it seems clear that both heads occupied an elevated position on the scene building. As the high-relief heads are of considerably larger scale than the three shoulder busts (6-8), they would have been

placed in a different part of the architecture, where they would have projected from friezelike slabs. Their larger scale may indicate a somewhat lower position on the facade, to coincide with

the gradually diminishing heights of the upper architectural orders as specified for superimposed orders by Vitruvius (5.6.6). High-relief heads with or without medallion frames occur in a variety of contexts in Roman architecture, as has been discussed above, pp. 34-35. Regarding the Theater heads, the height of the relief, the shape of the blocks, and the scale seem to eliminate the likelihood that they were

attached to capitals, coffers, or pediments, and there is no indication that they formed part of a continuous frieze. They may have been positioned on the podia over the side doors (hospitalia) of the first story of the scaenae frons. Such a position seems suitable for the slight turn of each head toward the center of the building. Since the podia over the hospitalia have a height of about 3.0 m, the medallion frames would easily fill the space and allow for some additional empty space at the sides. A location over the entrances from the parodoi to the orchestra might

also be a possibility,but the parodoi are too far from the findspots over the stage building to make this suggestion likely. Although the two high-relief heads have corresponding marble, dimensions, and probable location, they appear to represent different types of figures. Despite the poor state of preservation, it is clear that 10 is characterized as a wilder sort of figure by the water or vegetation streaming from the face and neck, and by the hair, which is deeply cut and strongly blown away from the face. The connection with water is strengthened by the dolphins swimming through the hair

(see Pls. 18:b, 19, and 20, with reconstruction drawing,P1.18:a). A figure connected with water and fish could represent a Nereid, Oceanus or a river god, Medusa, the eastern deity Atargatis,Skylla,or Triton.The streaming hair might suggest a marine figure such as a Nereid. This identification seems unlikely, however, since Nereids are portrayed as attractive, and the facial "growths" would therefore seem out of place, as comparison with figures in Dresden and Ostia illustrates.137The nose (1OF) may provide the best evidence for the

subject'ssex, not only for reason of its unusual breadth,but also its horizontal creases near the tip, which are more likely to belong to a male than a female figure. Oceanus or rivergods also seem unlikely, because they are characterized as older men with beards, although they too can be represented with dolphins, fish, seaweed, leaves, or fruit emerging from the hair.138 137. Dresden: Bieber 1961b, figs. 59, 60; Lattimore 1976, figs. 42, 43. Ostia: Lattimore 1976, fig. 41. Cf. the Nereid on a console from Aphrodisias (Mendel 1912-1914, II, no. 502); and Nereids on sarcophagi (EAA V, pp. 421-423, s.v. Nereoe Nereidi [Sichtermann]; EAA VII, pp. 989-993, fig. 1121, s.v. Tritone [Paribeni], in the Vatican Museums). See also Rumpf 1939; Fischer 1934. 138. Cf. EAA V, pp. 619-621, s.v. Oceano (Sichtermann). Cf. also Rumpf 1939, p. 125, no. 40, pl. 15, in Rome, Museo Nazionale; Matz 1968-1975, III, p. 387, no. 216, pl. 226:a, from

Rome, now in Baltimore, dated A.D. 200-210; Helbig4, I, no. 41, bust of a sea god in the Vatican Museums; and Amelung VatKat,III, 1, p. 130, no. 547, pl. 39. Oceanus is frequently shown with a rudder; see Hommel 1954, p. 112, note 519. See also Dunbabin 1978, pp. 149-154. Cf. the personification of a river god on the Antonine Altar at Ephesos (Oberleitner 1978, p. 86, no. 73, fig. 65), which appears to have stylized water across the shoulders and upper torso but not the face; the nose is missing.

HIGH-RELIEF HEADS OF NEREID (OR APHRODITE)

AND TRITON

89

Furthermore, the fish and multiple growthss make Medusa an unlikely choice, for the cheeks of gorgons from Pergamon, Didyma, Side, and Aphrodisias are smooth, as are those at Leptis Magna. In addition, the cheeks of the Leptis Magna Medusas are rounder and fleshier. Finally, the growths on the lower face acedand neck do not correspond to the snakes tied under the chin of Medusa, even less to stylized snakes such as those on the West Gate Arch at Leptis Magna.139 Atargatis, the eastern fish-goddess or goddess of vegetation, sometimes known as Dea Syria, would be an interesting subject, although what the significance of this figure would be for Corinth and what the contrasted female head (9) would represent are a mystery.140Atargatis has been suggested as a possible identification for some of the Leptis Magna figures on which hair blows forward onto the cheeks; stylized growths point upward on the cheeks (which could not, therefore, represent or be confused with water); and the hair is interlaced with opposing pairs of dogs' heads (two pairs), leaves, and dolphins' heads. In these examples, however, the necks have no growths. Among the cults attested for Corinth by literary or epigraphical sources, there is no evidence that this Syrian deity occupied an important position, and its representation on the scaenae frons seems unlikely.141 Skylla is depicted as a sea monster with appendages in the form of dogs. When she is a whole figure, as at Sperlonga and on sarcophagi and funerary monuments that are popular in South Italy and Sicily, the dogs emerge from about the hips. When her head alone is represented, as at Leptis Magna, dog protomes may emerge from her hair.142Some depictions display vertical growths on the neck, but on Hellenistic relief-wares these are fairly indistinct.143Unfortunately, in many cases, as with the statue of Skylla in the Athenian Agora, the human head is not preserved.144The Corinth head has no sign of dogs, so this suggestion, too, cannot be well argued. The best case can be made for Triton. The "growths" on the nose and right cheek could be interpreted as stylized depictions of seaweed or aquatic leaves, like the projections which point downward on the noses, cheeks, and necks of the Tritons in the Conservatori in Rome, dated to A.D. 191-192, and on some sarcophagi reliefs.l45 The projection on the right side of the neck, however, does not look watery and resembles some sort of growth, like the projections on the 139. Pergamon, Temple of Trajan:Stiller in AvPV, ii, pp. 20-25, pl. XII. Didyma, Temple of Apollo: Akurgal 1978, pl. 74:a.Side:Mansel1963,fig. 61. Aphrodisias:Mendel 1912-1914, II, no. 497. Leptis Magna:Ward-Perkins1948, pl. 9:4; Bianchi Bandinelliet al. 1966, figs. 115-118; and the LeptisMagnaarch: Ward-Perkins1948, pl. 9:3. Cf. also LIMCIV, pp. 285-330, pls. 163-188, s.v. Gorgo/Gorgones (Krauskopf);pp. 345-362, pls. Romanae(Paoletti):p. 349, no. 44 (Perga195-207, s.v. Gorgones mon), no. 45 (Didyma),no. 46 (Side,period ofAntoninus Pius); p. 350, no. 51 (Aphrodisias,Hadrianic);p. 356, no. 152 (Leptis Magna, Severan);p. 348, no. 27 (Rome, Temple of Venus and Roma); p. 349, no. 50 (Miletos, keystone of arch in theater, Antonine); and p. 350, no. 64 (Palermosarcophagus,Hadrianic to EarlyAntonine). See Barattolo 1982 for these heads in relation to the Temple of Venus and Roma. 140. Lucian, Syr.D. See Cumont 1956, pp. 103-106,117 (on fish sacred to her), 123 (on assimilation to Venus); EAAI, p. 757, s.v.Atargatis;Picard 1937; and Glueck 1937. In particular, note the relief bust of Atargatisas "a goddess of foliage and fruits" (Glueck 1937, figs. 14, 15; Picard 1937, fig. 2), which Glueck dates early 1st century A.c. In Syria,Atargatisis sometimes related to Artemis and Tyche. Cf. LIMCIII, p. 357, nos. 25, 26, s.v.Dea Syria(Drijvers),Khirbet-Tannur;p. 358, s.v.Dea Syria/Atargatis (Fleischer), Damascus.

141. CorinthVIII, iii contains no mention; Lisle 1955 does not have an entry for Atargatisor Dea Syria. 142. EAAVII, pp. 109-110, s.v. Scilla (Paribeni); Ridgway 1989. Sperlonga: LIMCVIII,pp. 1137-1145; p. 1142, no. 57,

s.v.Skylla(Jentel);cf. also p. 1144,no. 74 (London). See Waywell 1996 on the ScyllaMonument from Bargylia;Carter1970 on a Taranto tomb; and Bianchi Bandinelli et al. 1966, pp. 42, 94, fig. 120, on one from the Leptis MagnaForum, where the fins point upward. 143. Andreae 1988, p. 102, fig. 27. Cf. LIMCVIII,pp. 68-73, s.v. Triton (Icard-Gianolio); pp. 73-85, s.v. Tritones(IcardGianolio), esp. p. 78, no. 57, the Roman bronze bust from Aquileiawith growthson face and neck and lobster clawsin the 1997, figs. 17, 18, on the bronze bust in hair;and Walter-Karydi Clevelandwith growthson the sides of the neck. 144. Agora:Stemmer 1978, no. XII 1, pl. 78:1. 145. Fittschenand Zanker1985, no. 78, pl. 93, where associated with the portraitof Commodus;Cimaand La Rocca 1986, pp. 91-93, figs. 61-64. For sarcophagi,see Rumpf 1939, no. 29, pi. 8; Matz 1968-1975, III, no. 216, pl. 228:a (Baltimore);and LIMCVIII, p. 76, no. 32, s.v. Tritones(Icard-Gianolio).Bronze appliques also illustratethe motif;see Dunant 1967, pls. 37-38. Stylizedwater does not alwaysappear on the faces of Tritons, as, e.g., the figure in the VaticanMuseumsfrom Tivoli (Bieber 1961b, fig. 63; Lattimore1976, fig. 37; LIMCVIII,p. 78, no. 55, s.v. Tritones[Icard-Gianolio]);or the Tritons and Nereids on the "Altarof Domitius Ahenobarbus"(Bieber 1961b, figs. 808, 809; LIMCI, p. 730, no. 74, s.v. Amphitrite[Kaempf-Dimitriadou]). The Tritonsfrom Lykosoura,including the Roman replacement figure, also lack this detail (LIMCVIII,p. 75, no. 24, s.v. Tritones[Icard-Gianolio]).

90

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

that have been called gills.146 A third element, which arches neck of a Triton in Copenhagen the half of the over neck, could represent half of a double-arched piece of vegetaupward right

tion, such as a branch or vine, or stylized seaweed. Its irregular shape prevents it from being identified as the branch of an acanthus leaf, such as those that appear below the heads of the Medusa frieze at Didyma.147 The most compelling evidence is provided by the dolphins that seem to course downward out of the figure's hair as he rises from the sea. Parts of three are indicated among the surviving

pieces. The head and tail at the figure's lower right illustrate their long, narrow, and sinuous forms. A second dolphin

is indicated

at upper right by the tail and place of attachment

for the

body. The third, left of the central part, preserves the head and part of the body. The long, sinuous body of a fourth can be imagined within the breaks on the left side (see the reconstruction drawing, P1. 18:a). Long, narrow dolphins with curving bodies are also seen at Corinth in a wall painting on the tympanum of a Roman chamber tomb at Cheliotomylos, and paired marble dolphins drinking from vases are the central element of a later Corinthian capital.148 On the basis of the features described, Triton seems the most likely solution for the more complex of the

two relief heads (10). The second head (9) gives the impression of a calmer, more matronly figure. This characterization is conveyed by the mantle or veil that was raised over the head and by the hair, which hangs motionless and lacks any trace of fish, water, or vegetation. Without the help of a contrast-

ing companion, the identification of this figure would be difficult. The long hair and drapery indicate that the figure is female, but a mantle draped over and held behind the head could have numerous associations, as seen above in the discussion of the shoulder bust 8. The drapery is arranged differently

from that of 8, as it is spread out to the sides beyond the hair. It may be

arranged in this way to fill the space between the hair and the medallion border, which on its mate is taken up by hair; but a mantle arching behind the head is also a common motif in the Roman period. The drapery hangs vertically at proper right and is pulled somewhat toward the border at the left, where the corner is visible, as if raised by the left hand.149The drapery might also be imagined as hung over a backdrop, like a veil hung behind a cult statue, as if to recall the arrangement of a cult statue at Corinth.150As a backdrop it would resemble a theatrical device. A combination of paired personae as indicated here might include Triton and Aphrodite, a Nereid, Thetis, or Amphitrite; Atargatis and Aphrodite, as two contrasting goddesses of fertility (the Syrian male counterpart is Hadad, but there is no sign of him here); or Skylla and Charybdis.151 The first group seems most likely here and would most easily allow for the second head to be female, as is indicated. The association of Aphrodite with Triton is a natural one because of her birth from the sea, and they are paired sculpturally elsewhere,

as in Dresden and Paris. Although

Aphrodite frequently appears holding one end of an arched mantle, in such cases she wears her hair bound up, not hanging long and straight, as here.152Thetis or Amphitrite are also possible, but the long, unbound hair and the motif of the flying drapery that the woman holds find stron146. Copenhagen: Lattimore 1976, p. 60, fig. 38; LIMCVIII, pp. 73-85, esp. p. 77, no. 45, s.v. Tritones(Icard-Gianolio), early 3rd century A.C. Cf. also Charbonneaux 1964, no. 365, fig. on p. 245, two marine centaurs who carry Aphrodite have stylized water or vegetation on their faces and chests (Paris, Louvre). 147. Didyma: Akurgal 1978, pl. 74:a. 148. The Painted Tomb: Shear 1931b, pp. 431-436, fig. 6, dated late 1st century A.C. Dolphin capital, A-89-2: Williams and Zervos 1990, pp. 348-349, no. 16, pl. 66, dated late 2nd century A.C., where extensive drillwork in the mouths creates rather fierce expressions. 149. In other pedimental busts, such as that in the Monument of the Haterii, the mantle is adjusted with both hands; seeJucker 1961, fig. 32. 150. Compare, e.g., the reconstruction of the cult statue

group at Lykosouraas published by Stewart1990, fig. 788. 151. Skylla and Charybdis:Hommel 1954, pp. 114, 115; cf. Rumpf 1939, p. 107. On whole tritons, see Hommel 1954, p. 113, note 524. On Meerwesen on sarcophagi,see Koch and Sichtermann 1982, pp. 195-197, figs. 237-242, in the West; p. 422, fig. 473, Attic, in Kephissia,ca. A.D. 170-180. 152. See, e.g., Dresden:LIMCII,p. 56, no. 439, s.v.Aphrodite (Delivorrias),3rd century B.c.; Lattimore 1976, fig. 39; Paris, Louvre Ma 3537: LIMCVIII,p. 80, no. 87b, s.v. Tritones(IcardGianolio), statue of Aphrodite flanked by large dolphin and Triton, 4th century A.C. For Aphrodite holding such a mantle, see LIMCVIII,pp. 218-221, nos. 292-321, s.v. Venus(Schmidt). On Aphrodite from the Corinth Theater,see 15 and Sturgeon 1998a.

HIGH-RELIEF HEADS OF NEREID (OR APHRODITE)

AND TRITON

91

ger parallels among Nereids in the Roman period, and a Nereid would be a good counterpart A Nereid is depicted with Triton, with her mantle arched behind her and holdfor the Triton.153 ing one end of it, on the mosaic from the Roman Bath at Isthmia of the mid-2nd century154and on a sarcophagus in Kephissia dated ca. A.D. 170-180.155A colossal female bust from Aphrodisias, which is in the form of a console figure, is identifiable as a Nereid because of the dolphins in her hair, the ketosheld against her chest, a second ketoson the right, and a hippocamp on the lower surface.156The symbolism at Corinth refers to water or to love (love as a product of watery forces),

that is, to the realms of Poseidon and Aphrodite, who are both key figures at Corinth. A Triton and Nereid could be presented as adjunct to each and therefore to the city-goddess, even to

Corinth itself. A pair of anguiped Tritonsfrom the Severan theater at Hierapolis were originally located over the side doors of the facade, probably on the upper order, or else as akroteria-an

interesting echo in the Roman East to the conjectured location of the Corinth Triton.157 The similar size, material, format, and rendering show that the high-relief heads were made to go together. Moreover, the technique seems commensurate with other sculptures associated with the scaenae frons. The hair of the Nereid, for example, is similar in rendering to the hanging

locks of the female shoulder bust 8. The flat shelf of the lower eyelid of O1Erecalls the lower lids of portraitsof the Trajanicperiod, as on the bust of the Decennial type in the Capitoline Museums.158The eyelid is also reminiscent of the Roman lion-head water spout made as a replacement for the sima of the Temple of Poseidon at Isthmia. In fact, the large scale and comparable use of these two sculptures suggest the possibility that masons practiced at making architectural

simas may also have been called upon to work on the architecturalsculptures of the Theater,for these high-relief heads are similarlysmoothed in their finished surfaces, and the bulging, round eyes of the Isthmia lion are similar to the eye of the Demeter(?) bust.159 Moreover,these heads do not exhibit the characteristicdrillworkfound on sculptures of Late Hadrianic date and later. Portraits of Antinous, which date after A.D. 130, for example, may exhibit frequent use of the drill, both stationary and running, but this is not true of all examples, and renderings vary. The absence of running drillwork of itself is not diagnostic, for Attic funerary reliefs from ca. A.D. 150 may also employ the chisel more exclusively than the running drill.160 The relief heads are less heavily carved than over life-size works used in other elevated contexts at Corinth, such as the male and female figures from the Captives' Facade.161Their hair also lacks the florid, more convoluted handling of the bust of a "sophist"from the Theater of Dionysos in Athens, probably from the early 3rd century, on which the locks are more complexly separated and undercut.162 In addition, the Corinth high-relief heads lack the small connective struts 153. Thetis may be represented, for instance, with a baby Triton,as in a statuein Rome, MuseoNazionale (Lattimore1976, fig. 20; Helbig4,III,no. 2294); and on the VillaAlbanisarcophagus her head is completely veiled (EAAVII, pp. 775-779, fig. 895, s.v. Teti[Paribeni]). On Greek vasesAmphitrite is depicted veiled with the "bridalgesture" (so in LIMCI, pp. 727, 728, nos. 25, 26, 43, 53a, s.v.Amphitrite [Kaempf-Dimitriadou]), but in Roman mosaics her bare head can be decorated with seaweed, dolphins, and pincers (LIMCI, p. 725, nos. 7, 8, s.v.Amphitrite [Kaempf-Dimitriadou];Dunbabin 1978, p. 272). 154. See Packard1980. 155. On Nereids, see LIMCVI, pp. 785-824, s.v. Nereides (Icard-Gianolio,Szabados);p. 798, no. 176 (Isthmia); and p. 795, no. 131 (Kephissia). On the Kephissia sarcophagus, see also Koch and Sichtermann 1982, pp. 371, 415, 422, fig. 473, dated A.D. 180.

156. LIMCVI,p. 820, no. 486, s.v. Nereides(Icard-Gianolio, Szabados). 157. See Bejorin HierapolisIII,pp. 21-24, esp. p. 23 on location, pls. 12-13, the Triton without "seaweed"or dolphins as preserved.Analogous in location but different in meaning are the Nereids in terracottarelief that ride on hippocamps above

the entablatureof the theaterfacade,from the Tombof P.Nomitorius Hilarus on the Via Salaria,now in Rome, Museo Nazionale-where the symbolism would be funerary; see Bieber 1961a, p. 162, fig. 588. Full-bodiedTritonsoccur at Ephesos on the honorarymonument for C. L. BassusofA.D. 80/81 (Ephesos X, i, nos. 88-92). 158. Capitoline Museums, Stanza dei Imperatori 22, inv. 1276:Fittschenand Zanker1985, pp. 41-42, pls. 45-47, no. 42, A.D. 108 or later.

159.IsthmiaI, pp. 152-153, no. HS15,pl. 35:c,in Corinth.The lion heads from the Roman sima are under studyby E Hemans. 160. On Antinous, see Meyer 1991. Relief of Artemidoros, Athens, NM 1192:Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 94. 161. Photographsin CorinthIX, pp. 101-104, nos. 217, 218, 221, 222; Vermeule 1986. 162.Athens, NM 419:Jucker1961, p. 108, St Suppl. 1,pl. 46, A.D. 150-160; Fittschen 1971, pp. 224-249, Early Severan; though Inan and Alfoldi-Rosenbaum(1979, p. 145) and Datsouli-Stavridi(1985, pp. 84-85, pls. 118-119) consider it Gallienic, and Rhomiopoulou (1997, pp. 104-105, no. 105), ca. 200. Autopsy supports the early-3rd-centurydate, as do the Italian marble (probablyCarrara)and artist.

ARCHITECTURAL

92

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

found in late-2nd- to early-3rd-century sculptures, such as those from Leptis Magna and from the Baths of Caracalla in Rome.163On the Leptis Magna heads, tight curls, deep drillwork, and pierced irises make them appear considerably later than their Corinthian counterparts. The Conservatori Tritons of A.D. 191-192 offer a similar contrast.164The high-relief heads, therefore, may be associated with the Hadrianic architectural phase of the Theater. SILENOS PIERS (11-12) 11

Silenos pier A

Pls. 21-25

11A Head P1. 23:a, b S-674: tr. S-674/936/973/3604. Theater, 34b, 1903. S-936: Theater, tr. 34b, southwest corner, 1909 (Corinth NB 57, p. 8). S-973: Theater, tr. 34b, 1910. S-3604: probably 1926. P.L. 0.295, p.W. 0.222, p.Th. 0.115, p.L. central forehead to midnose 0.174, W. at temples 0.173, W. outer corners of eyelids 0.122, rest. H. head 0.308, rest. W. head with hair ca. 0.30 m. Fourjoining fragments, preserving top of head, eyes, and part of nose; head broken under right eye, above the mouth, and from the pier at back. Missing chips from both eyebrows and outer surface of nose, hair at right; surface worn, weathered. Traces of red (10R 5/8) and a strong brown (7.5YR 5/6) pigment remain in the hair, yellow (10YR 7/8) on the irises, and possibly light brown (7.5YR 6/6) over the forehead. Bibliography: CorinthIX, pp. 53-54, no. 65; Schwingenstein 1977, p. 37, dated Roman and associated with the decoration of the Roman theater building. 1 lB Right forearm and hand P1. 24:a S-483/485/487. Theater, tr. 34b, central stage building, 3.5 m deep, 1903 (Corinth NB 26, p. 39). P.L. 0.370, p.L. arm 0.237, p.W. wrist 0.123, W. hand 0.146, p.Th. 0.123 m. Three joining fragments; hand broken through middle of thumb, second, and third fingers, at base of fourth, arm broken diagonally through middle of forearm and from torso at back. Outer surfaces weathered, worn, and missing some chips. Traces of reddish paint (1OR 5/8) detectable under the weathering on the forearm. P1. 24:b 11C Raised hand with bent left arm S-3590. Findspot unknown, probably from Theater excavations. P.L. 0.510, p.W. 0.369, p.Th. 0.200, H. relief at elbow 0.172, L. hand 0.088, W. hand 0.128 m. Fourjoining fragments. Arm missing large chip from lower forearm and base of hand. P1. 24:c 11D Fragment from chest S-3581. Museum basement marble pile, probably from the Theater. P.L. 0.172, p.W. 0.170, p.Th. 0.103 m. Three joining fragments; broken all around. Surface chipped, worn. 163. Leptis Magna: Ward-Perkins 1948. Rome: Marvin 1983, pls. 47-54, esp. pp. 364-365, figs. 14, 15 on pl. 50, the head of a girl (Museo Nazionale); Papadopoulos in MusNazRom, I, 1,

liE

Lower mantle and legs PI. 21:b S-430/982/3586. Theater. S-430, lower mantle: tr. 34a, central stage building, 1902 (Corinth NB 26, p. 39; 56, p. 73; 57, list p. 8). S-982, possibly r. leg: tr. 34, north extension, bank in southwest corner of 1910 trench, or near stylobate in Peristyle Court north of central stage building. S-3586, background: possibly 1926. P.L. 0.920, p.W. 0.635, p.Th. background 0.134, p.L. mantle 0.275, p.L. center 1.leg 0.560, p.L. r.leg 0.430, diam. 1. leg top 0.195, bottom 0.140, diam. r. leg 0.212, p.Th. r. leg 0.322, projection r. leg from background 0.242 m. Eleven joining fragments, draped figure; broken through central torso, back of thighs, at left ankle, and through right lower leg. Left leg broken from background for nearly the entire length. Missing segments from central part of pier and bottom of right leg. Bibliography: Corinth IX, pp. 53-54, no. 65; leg referred to p. 53 (not illustrated); Richardson 1902, p. 22. 1IF Fragment of hair, probably leg PI. 24:d S-486. Theater, tr. 34b, central stage building, 3.5 m deep, 1903 (Corinth NB 26, p. 39). P.L. 0.132, p.W. 0.055, p.Th. 0.083, p.L. hair 0.118 m. Single fragment; broken on three sides. Surface worn, weathered, with some encrustation. P1. 24:e 11G Rightfoot S-3589. Museum marble pile, probably from Shear's excavations in the Theater. P.H. 0.245, H. plinth 0.107, p.L. foot 0.258, W. foot 0.156, p.W. leg 0.159 m. Single fragment; foot broken through heel, above first row of hair; plinth broken on two sides and at back. Red pigment (10R 5/8) forms a solid triangle on each side of the boot. 11H Left foot P1. 24:f S-3588. Museum marble pile, probably from Shear's excavations in the Theater. P.H. 0.209, H. plinth 0.118; foot: H. 0.090, p.L. 0.202, W. 0.138 m. Single fragment; foot broken across instep, plinth broken on sides and rear. Faint traces of a painted red (10R 5/8) triangle survive on each side. 11A-H: Marble, white, medium grained; micaceous, with gray streaks; Pentelic. These eight pieces are associated because of similarity of material, technique, scale, and subject. 11A represents

pp. 165-166. 164. Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 78, pl. 93.

SILENOS PIERS

the upper front of a Silenos head from an over life-size figure. The masklikeface, with its exaggerated features, would have had a dramatic appearance when displayed out-of-doors.The hair over the crown,which wasworked in low relief with a chisel, is centrally parted, framing the face with long, continuous waves. Behind the first strands,the hair is sketchilyworked and recessed, as if it would not have been seen, and the skull is roughly blocked out. Thick hair from the beard and head waves down toward the torso in two large, carefully chiseled segments, with a third more twistedsection forming the end of the moustache. The high, rounded forehead is creased by three furrows strongly setting off thick rolls of flesh. The brows are knit, the right more plastically rendered, with its bulging forms sharplyoutlined, notablythe circularprojection near the center.Both eyebrowsprojectwith thick, S-shapedhairs. The eyes are deeply set; the stronglyprojecting upper lid has a rounded upper surface;the lower is nearlyflat and unmarked.The right eyeballis rounded, but the left is flatter,suggesting a turn of the head. The inner corners are long, pointing downward;the upper lid extends beyond the lower at the outer corners, beyond which three sharp creases represent crow's feet. The flesh sags markedlybeneath the eye and the cheek bone is prominently modeled. Unlike 12A, there is no hair on the bridge of the nose. The asymmetryin the facial features suggests that the head turned somewhat to proper left. It was therefore probablyattached to the left half of the scaenae frons, facing viewer'sright. This coincides with its findspot, west of center stage. 11B consists of most of the right hand and forearm from a large figure wearinga long-sleevedhairycostume. Four projectingveins are visibleon the back of the hand; two sharply chiseled creases define the fleshy folds between thumb and firstfinger. The hand is open, as if the arm were held loosely at the figure's side, against the hanging mantle folds. Except for the thumb, the fingers are close together, separated by narrow,smoothed drill channels. On the forearm,four rowsof wavyhair,thicker and shorter near the hand, are partiallypreserved. The rowslengthen from proper left to right (L.firstrow0.032, second 0.020-0.071, third 0.045-0.070, fourth 0.052 m). The surface of the hand is not polished, but traces of short rasping remain. The lack of detailed carving near the back shows that this area was less visible. On 1 C, the indefinite treatment of the hand and the angle of the elbow in relation to the curve of the shoulder make interpretation difficult. The fragment represents the left arm and hand. The hanging folds indicate the vertical orientation, locating the hand at the top. The elbow projects straight forward from the figure, so that the hand, which is turned with the fingers facing outward,is brought to the shoulder or somewhat above it. The hand grasps one end of the mantle and a smooth object, possiblya wineskin,which is carriedover the shoulder. The hairy costume is worked on all sides, with more detail beside the drapery.The underside of the upper arm is sketchilycarved;it would have been hidden from

165. For other measuring bosses at Corinth, cf. the portrait of Domitian, S-2272 (de Grazia 1973, p. 124).

93

view by the projecting elbow. Near the top of the highest fold, a small section of drapery was added separately; in contrast to the coarse finish of the surface around it, the area prepared for adhesive is very smooth. No dowel hole secured the join. 11D is a relatively flat, hairy segment, suggesting the center of the chest. Parts of three rows of S-shaped locks (H. 0.048-0.057 m) are preserved. HIE depicts the lower portion of a standing, over lifesize Silenos with his weight on the left leg, the right leg free. Folds from a mantle, probably fastened over the left hip, hang loosely above the right knee and cross diagonally to the left hip, leaving a corner with small tassel resting above the left knee. Fold lines are stiff, and the surface has a roughened finish, perhaps to denote a coarse fabric and to emphasize the subject's rustic character. The right leg projects farther from the background than the left, and its width suggests that it is turned somewhat to the side. The shaggy garment covering the legs reaches the ankles; the left leg retains nine rows of hair (L. 0.055-0.070 m), the right, parts of seven. The rows have sharp horizontal separations. The beginning of the top flap of a boot is detectable above the break on the left leg. Near the bottom of the left leg is preserved a worn, round element with a pin-prick hole near the center. Since this occurs in the middle of a row of shaggy hair, it is not a curl, but probably a measuring point or boss. Its location, in the center of the front of the leg, would seem to confirm this interpretation.165 The figure projects in high relief from a background slab. The thickness of the background as preserved may equal the original thickness of the slab, although the marble has split along a vein and the back as preserved shows no signs of working. A figure in such high relief would be best supported by a background slab of thickness similar to the height of relief. 11F contains a segment of woolly costume, probably from the leg. Parts of two rows survive (max. p.L. 0.05 m). Deep channels subdivide the locks, as on 11E. Despite weathering, these strands appear more twisted than those on other fragments. The outer surface is relatively flat vertically, but has a gradual curve at the side, so the piece may come from the front of the leg. The right foot (11G) stands flat on the plinth, shod in a soft boot with a wide tassel or flap in front that emerges from under the lower edge of the shaggy hair. The short, wide proportions of the foot perhaps act as optical correction for an elevated viewing angle. Seen straight on, the sides of the foot appear to recede. Part of the worked front and right side of the plinth survives. 11H, the left foot, wears a tasseled boot and rests flat on the plinth. The wide foot has a lightly textured finish. At left and in front, the block is cut back with a point for ca. 0.07 m below the line of the sole. The cut-back may have provided a place to tie lifting ropes, which would have encircled the circumference of the figure, and it also shows that the feet projected beyond the plinth. Hadrianic.

94

12 Silenos pier B

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

Pls. 22, 23, 25

12A Fragmentaryhead P1.23:c-e S-3573.Museumbasement marblepile, probablyfrom the Theater.Joins uninventoried fragment from Shear's excavations(rightside with hair). Another piece (S-578), which may derive from this head, is housed in the Museum storerooms. P.H. relief 0.162, p.W.0.232, p.L. face 0.108, W. outer corners eyelids 0.122 m. Twojoining fragments; head broken across bottom of eyebrows,base of moustache,through cheeks and hair. Missingouter surfacesof nose and moustache,chips from eyelids. Yellowpigment (10YR7/8) remains on the iris and along the boundaryof hair and face, as if for outlining; red (10R 5/8) on the underside of the upper left eyelid.Additionalred paint (10R5/8) is preservedthroughout hair and beard, faded to a lighter tone on the higher locks, and some light brown (7.5YR6/4) on the face. P1.25:a 12B Hairy arm S-3574. Theater, eastern corner of valva regia, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 433, in 5g [see Plan I]). P.L.0.180, p.W. 0.144, p.Th. 0.049 m. Single fragment; arm broken all around. Surface chipped, worn, and weathered. 12C Right(?) forearm P1.25:b S-937/3582. Theater.S-937:tr.34, central stage building, 1909 (Corinth NB 56, p. 7). In Corinth NB 56, p. 71, of 1909, Dinsmoor refers to many fragments found just above the stage front. S-3582:Shear'sexcavations. P.L.0.245, p.W.0.125, p.Th. 0.116 m. Threejoining fragments;broken all around. One side blackened and encrusted. P1.25:c 12D Forearm S-3591. Theater, north end of passage between Peristyle Court and East Theater Plaza, 1929. Found with T-13 from Herakles' Labor of the Erymanthian Boar, which probablyfell from the east end of the third story of the scaenae frons (Corinth NB 322, p. 829, inJ1l). P.L.0.276, diam. atwrist0.143, diam. near elbow0.146, Th. 0.152-0.165 m. Single fragment; arm broken at both ends. Surface worn, missing a few chips. 12E Hand, left(?) P1.25:d, e S-3649.Museum marble pile, probablyfrom the Theater. P.L.0.186, W. hand and object 0.182, W. hand 0.125, Th. 0.018, p.L. hair 0.155 m. Single fragment;hand broken through wrist,missing most of thumb, first finger. Back heavilyweathered. Pl. 25:f 12F Two fingers S-567.Theater, tr. 34b, 1903 (Corinth NB 26, p. 74). P.L.0.100, p.W. 0.092, p.Th. 0.038 m. Single fragment, two fingers; broken near base and through one nail. P1.25:g 12G Right(?) leg S-3587.Findspot unknown, probablyTheater excavations. P.L.0.488, W.0.210-0.248, p.Th. 0.245, H. relief0.137, p.Th. background 0.108 m.

Twojoining fragments;leg broken and chipped near top, brokendiagonallythroughside.Backis not preserved. 12H Fragmentaryhairy leg P1.25:h S-3577/3580. Museum basement marble pile, probably from the Theater. P.L.0.465, p.W. 0.130-0.175, p.Th. 0.084-0.117 m. Twojoining fragments;leg broken near mantle and above ankle. Surface chipped, weathered; front side of lower leg badly abraded. 121 Hairy limb(?) P1.25:i S-3576.Museumbasementmarblepile, probablyfrom the Theater. P.L.0.100, p.W. 0.038, Th. 0.054 m. Single fragment;broken all around. Surfacechipped and worn. 12J Left foot P1.25j S-3607.Museum marble pile, probablyfrom the Theater. P.H. 0.181, p.L. 0.152, W. foot 0.142 m. Single fragment;foot broken across base of toes and instep. Faint traces of red (10R 4/6) and brown (7.5 YR 5/6) pigment survive. 12A-J: Marble, white, fine to medium grained; micaceous; Pentelic. These 10 pieces are grouped on the basisof their similar scale, material,and form. 12Apreservesthe central segment of a Silenos face, including the eyes, upper cheeks, nose, and a section of hair at right. The upper eyelids are thicker and project farther than those of 11A,but the size and shape of the eyesare approximatelythe same. The lower right lid is set off from the cheek by a crease, and the pockets below the eyes are stronglyemphasized, particularlythe left, which is deeper. The lower outline of the nose, nostrils,and moustachesurvive,belowwhich, part of the thick upper lip is visible. The right cheek is irregular,suggesting a "wart,"though the tooling may simply be bumpy. The hair is rendered as thick clumps with twistingstrandsand beveled sides. The surfacesare smoothed, but not polished. Some short,light raspmarks remain, as on 11A. Asymmetriesin the face may provide a clue to its position. The left eyeball rounds outward,the right is flatter; the left eyelids project more than the right; and the fleshy folds in the cheek are more plastic on right than left. The head, then, would have turned to proper right, and the pier was probably located on the right side of the building, facing viewer'sleft. 12B, a fragmentary arm, is covered by five rows of thick, S-shapedlocks. The strands are cursorilyworked with a chisel (L. locks 0.042-0.048 m). The limb bends on one side and is more sketchilycarvedon the other, so it derives from a bent, projecting elbow. 12C preservesa forearm,possiblythe right,wearing a woolly costume. 12D is a segment of a forearm, possibly the left, similarly garbed, with a bit of skin visible at the

wrist(W.0.102 m). The main side is decoratedwith seven rows of wavyhair (H. each row 0.040-0.045 m). Horizontal separations are strongly marked by smoothed channels. Verticalgrooves, more deeply worked toward the back, divide strandsinto locks. The back is undercut

SILENOS PIERS

near the elbow, forming a ridge, so it was probablyin a raised position. The findspot suggests association with the Silenos on the right side of the scaenae frons. 12E preserves an over life-size hand next to a small segment of drapery. The scale, tooling, micaceous marble, and hair at the wrist establish association with the Silenos figures. The figure holds an object with a flared end that extends about one finger'swidth beyond the end of the little finger. The original, flat end of the object is preserved.The object could depict the end of a money bag or a wineskin (see discussion below, p. 96). The back of the hand is more sketchily finished than that of 1IB, but compares favorablywith 11C, so it may have been held in a comparable position. As the hand is flexed at an angle to the wristand the back is rough, the arm was probablyraised, holding a wineskin, as was the left arm 11C. Since 12E probably also represents a left hand, the silenoi would be a matched rather than a mirror-image pair.

12Fcontainstwofingersnearlycomplete, slightlyseparated, and curved around some drapery.The fingers are RECONSTRUCTION

(11,

95

the same scale as the right hand 1 B. The fingers probably derive from the right hand, held down, of a second Silenos. 12G features part of a leg covered with shaggy hair, connected to a smallsection of background.Partsof eight rows of hair survive,but no drapery.Because the upper edge is so wide, the piece may represent the free, outturned leg, possibly the right, of the second Silenos. 12H is most of a leg, perhaps the left. Parts of eight rows of a woolly costume survive (H. 0.053-0.060 m). The hair resembles that of the legs 1 E and 12G. 121preservesa small segment of hair set in rowson a graduallycurving surface, each row H. 0.068 m. The degree of curvesuggeststhatthe piece formed partof a limb. 12Jexhibits most of a left foot from a Silenos wearing a boot with a triangularflap, the roughly finished surface suggestive of leather. The front and left side of the foot are undercut, 0.035 m on the side, more in front. The recessed section appears to elevate the foot, perhaps to make it visible from below. Hadrianic.

12)

Parts of two hairy silenoi survive on a scale somewhat over life-size. A minimum number of two is indicated by the presence of two heads, two left forearms, and two left feet (Pls. 21:a, 22). In addition, among the 18 fragments presented, parts of possibly two other forearms, four hands, four legs, and one right foot are preserved. Few drapery fragments have been recognized, but the roughened finish of the drapery surfaces may have kept such pieces from being identified at the time of excavation. Separate catalogue numbers are given to the two figures, although it is not possible to associate the fragments with one or another figure with certainty. Tentative groupings of the fragments have been made to facilitate discussion. Eight additional fragments from

the Silenos piers are kept in the museum storerooms, most with segments of hair.166 That the silenoi formed part of the architectural decoration of the scaenae frons is indicated by the findspots of fragments that came to light in the trenches of 1902 and 1903, which crossed the central part of the scaenae frons (see Plan I). Although their limbs are worked nearly in the round, the relief ground from which they emerge is illustrated by 1lE. Where attached to this figure, the background is preserved only to a thickness of 0.127 m, but the piece has broken from a thicker slab. Such high-relief figures would seem to require a slab of some thickness, as would be afforded by a pier, in order to render them adequate support. The height of the silenoi can be estimated from the height of the best-preserved segments, their apparent proportions, and comparison with better-preserved standing silenoi.167 An estimated height for the head h1A of 0.30 m allows for a total figure height of ca. 1.80 m, if a proportion of 1:6 for head to total height, which is exhibited by two similar silenoi in Delos, is followed. This height plus the plinth height of ca. 0.10 m yields an estimated height of ca. 1.90 m for the relief pier with plinth. Thus far there is no evidence for the form of the upper or lower edges of the blocks or for their thickness. A few fragments preserve small sections of the sides of the blocks, such as 1lE, where the edge is evenly tooled with a claw chisel. That the edge is adjacent to the mantle on 11E and that the plinths under the right foot 11 G and left foot 11H are each treated with the point on the outer sides indicate that the figures, which would have an estimated width of ca. 0.080 m, may have extended beyond the vertical edges of the blocks. The asymmetrical features of the heads can be interpreted as indicating the direction in which the silenoi faced. In particular, the bulging versus flatter eyeballs are in opposite positions on the 166. For additional fragments from the Silenos piers, see S486a, S-578, S-3578, S-3579, S-3627, S-3628 (hair); S-3304 (hair and drapery); and S-3630 (drapery).

167. For the proportions, cf. Delos, Archaeological Museum A 4122, A 4123 (Marcad6 1969, pl. 23), in which the relationship of head to total height falls in the range of 1:5.5 to 1:6.

96

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

two figures. The heads were probably in three-quarter view, with the rounder eyes on the side closer to the viewer, the flatter eyeball and less plastic lids farther from the viewer. On the evidence that the heads turnin opposite directions, the silenoi are restored each facing the central axis. In addition, the pose of the lower torso and legs of iE, which seems to lean somewhat toward viewer's right, is appropriate for a position at viewer's left. The degree of breakage of many fragments corresponds to a high position, as does the traditional placement of such support figures at this period. Their size corresponds to that of the third-story columns, and the thseird reconstruction elevel on the lescaenae of the frons, probably in findspots and size suggest of a column Silenos were found in 1903, in 12-13, Moreover, 35-37). many fragments place (pp. the middle of the straight section to left of the porta regia, with some noted on the opposite side. Examination of the four forearms suggests that the figures are not mirror images. One of the arms (11C) is held up and is sharply bent at the elbow. A second and third (l1B, 12C) hang down at the figures' sides, but the hand 12E appears to be raised like the left hand l1C. The hand 12E is difficult to interpret, but if it represents a left hand, then the silenoi were not a mirror-image pair, but repeat the same pose. It is difficult to be certain on this point. The Corinth Silenos shown in the composite reconstruction drawing (P1. 21:a) is a standing figure with the weight on the left leg, the right leg free and somewhat to right. The right arm is down at the side, fingering the drapery, while the left is raised to hold the end of a wine sack over the left shoulder. The figure is covered by a hairy costume that extends to below the wrists and ankles. Over this is wrapped a mantle that has an overfold extending nearly to the left knee, with a short tassel at the tip. The Silenos wears soft shoes with triangular flaps and possibly with raised soles. Both feet are flat on the ground, the toes pointing outward. Folds in the mantle curve down toward the right legfigur,the vertical axis of the figure would have been emphasized on the left. The tensed and raised left arm is on the side of the weight leg, while the relaxed right arm is on the side of the free leg, perpetuating the Polykleitan tradition in a different format. The Corinth Silenos pose is based on a figural type that appears in two Early Hellenistic statues from a small Dionysiac sanctuary on Delos, the Stibadeion. The Delian figures similarly form a pair that repeats the pose with raised left hands and the location of the tips of the overfolds; their use as a pair is reflected by the opposite turn of the heads, as at Corinth. Variation in the mantle arrangement is introduced in the Delian statues, as in the draping or undraping of the chest, and they also wear sandals. The nature of the object held by our figures is suggested by the complete preservation of the wineskin on the back of the Delian sculpture A 4123. Three deep cuttings and two cut channels indicate the intention of attaching the figure to a bench or wall, even though the drapery and wineskin are sketched out in back.168The Delos silenoi have long, pointed horse ears, but there is no indication of such ears here. The hair forms a natural pattern over the Delos bodies, as in examples in Athens and Berlin, contrasting with the regular division into rows on the Corinth versions.169The standing silenoi from the Theater of Dionysos in Athens also wear woolly garments with hair in rows, but unlike the Corinth versions the garment hair is rendered as wavy locks ending in circles, and the rows are not separated by strong horizontal grooves.170

Like the freestanding Delian figures, the Corinth silenoi may be intended to represent actors wearing costumes rather than Silenos himself, since the heavy hair completely covers the torso and limbs but not the wrists and ankles, in the manner of a costume. In this respect, the Corinth 168. Marcad6 1969, pp. 113, 186-201, 288, 450, pl. 23. On silenoi in general, see LIMC VIII, pp. 1108-1133, s.v. Silenoi (Simon). 169. Athens, NM 257, the statue of a Papposilenos that holds the tragic mask of a silenos: Karouzou 1968, p. 97; LIMC III, p. 480, no. 687, s.v. Dionysos(Gasparri). Berlin: Reinach 1897-1930, II, pl. 53:6 (Bieber 1961a, p. 100); I, p. 533 (Bieber 1961a, pp. 88-101). Cf. also Delos, Archaeological Museum A 4143 (with

Dionysos): Marcade 1969, pl. 23. On possible prototypes for the silenoi from the Athens theater, see Schmidt 1982, p. 125. On paint on the silenos in Athens, see Yfantidis 1984; cf. also the actor dressed as Silenos in Rome, dated Antonine: MusNazRom, I, 1, no. 108; Helbig4, III, no. 2290. 170. Herbig 1935, pp. 10-14, pls. 2-4; Despinis 2003, pp. 140-142.

SILENOS PIERS

97

figures contrast with the two silenoi at Tivoli, which are hairy only in certain areas and may represent actual silenoi rather than actors. The strongly furrowed forehead and deep-set eyes create a masklike impression for our figures, as on the silenoi from the Theater of Dionysos in

There is no indicaAthens, and recall those on decorative reliefs and in the Theater at Ostia.171 tion that ours were holding masks.172 Standing architectural support figures were represented initially in frontal position, the weight

evenly balanced on both legs and both arms raised, as the telamones from the early-5th-century Temple of Zeus at Agrigento and in the Forum Baths at Pompeii of the 1st century B.C. With this pose, the sculptures gave the impression of giving actual support to the architecture.173 The choice of a "hip-shot" pose for the Corinth silenoi suggests a lack of concern for features once considered appropriate to architectural support figures. In the Corinth silenoi frontality is broken by turning the heads and emphasizing the weight shift in the hips through the diagonal fold in the mantle. The fact that both arms are not raised, which is characteristic of Western figures in the Hellenistic period, marks an important point of deviation from the basic conception of a supportive figure.174In the Roman period, one supporting arm is more common than two, as is exemplified by the Pans from the Theater of Pompey in Rome and the satyr from the Kyzikos pillar, who holds one arm over his head, but not in a supportive position. Other support figures against piers come from the Theater of Dionysos in Athens and from the theater in the lower city at Pergamon, but in these cases, as at Corinth, the location of the pier figures on the scaenae

frons is uncertain.175

Not surprisingly, silenos sculptures are popular in theaters, and a number take the form of

support figures, beginning with the Hellenistic figures from western Greece, as at Monte Iato. Silenoi also occur as support figures in the theater on Delos, in standing and kneeling positions.176The silenos of "Cista/Liknophoros" type found in the odeion at Ephesos was probably used as decoration on the building facade erected in the mid-2nd century A.C.177Some theaters

have support figures in the form of other Dionysiac figures, like Pan at Segesta and at the Theater of Pompey in Rome, the satyrson piers at Ephesos, or the maenad figures and relief from Arles.178The Theater of Dionysos in Athens has parts of several sets of silenoi of different sizes. The one with both hands on the hips and the head bent far forward so as to carry the weight on the neck has four colossal counterparts in Paris, and is also represented in a table support in 171. Masks,however,have large circles cut out for the eyes. Reliefs: Bieber 1961a, pp. 155-159. Ostia: Bieber 1961a, fig. 805; Meiggs 1973, pp. 42, 80, its present form dated to the end of the 2nd century A.C.Athens: Herbig 1935, pls. 2:2, 4:3. 172. The Tivoli figures support kalathoiwith both hands; see Schmidt 1982, pp. 106-107, 125-126, pl. 35:3 (used with copies of the Erechtheion korai); and Raeder 1983, pp. 230, 311-312, nos. I 81, I 82, pls. 22, 24:a, of Late Hellenistic type. Fora differentrenderingof hairyskin,see the statuettein Rome, Museo Nazionale, connected with the grotesque version of Silenos that appears in satyricdrama: MusNazRom,I, 8:2, pp. 377-378, no. VIII, 12, dated ca. mid-2nd centuryA.c.; Mandel, however,in discussing the actor in silenos costume in the Villa Albani, dates the Museo Nazionale silenos to the first half of the 1st century A.C., in contrast to the Albani piece, which he places in the late 2nd century A.C. See also Bol 1989-1998, IV, pp. 300-307, no. 485, pl. 174. Athens: Herbig 1935, pp. 10-14, pls. 2-4. 173. Agrigento: Schmidt-Colinet 1977, no. M 1; Schmidt 1982, pp. 154-155. Pompeii: Castiglione 1975, pp. 211, 212, figs. 206, 207, most with hairyskirts;Schmidt 1982, p. 117. 174. Cf. support figures from Monte Iato, Syracuse, and Pompeii: the silenoi and maenads from Monte Iato: IslerKerenyi 1976; and figures from Pompeii: Castiglione 1975; Schmidt-Colinet1977; Schmidt 1982, pp. 114-115, 121; LIMC

VIII, Suppl., p. 1129, no. 207a, s.v. Silenoi(Simon). The pier figures from Ephesos are fragmentary,but the right arm was raised, probablyover the head, as at Kyzikos(Schmidt 1982, p. 130, pl. 38:1). For the Atlas from Thessalonikiwith both arms raised, see Thessaloniki I, pp. 58-60, no. 39, and StefanidouTiveriou 1998, with further bibliography. On Atlas, see also LIMCIII, pp. 2-16, s.v. Atlas (de Grino, Olmos; Arce, Balmaseda), esp. p. 12, nos. 65, 66, for support figures from Pietrabbondante and Pompeii (Odeum). 175. Athens: Herbig 1935, p. 9, pl. 1. Pergamon:AvPVII,i, pp. 291-293, nos. 380-382. 176. Delos, Archaeological Museum A 4175a, b, standing, with weight shifted, mantle about the hips: Marcade1969, pp. 198, 449, pl. 22; A 4178, A 4179, kneeling: Marcade 1969, pp. 137, 199, 448, pl. 24. The standing figures were probablyused in the architecture,the kneeling ones as supportsfor an altar. 177. Aurenhammerin EphesosX,i, pp. 75-76, no. 56, pl. 37, London, BM 1257, dated before A.D. 161;the dedicatorsof this phase of the odeion, P. Vedius Antoninus and wife, also dedicated a statuarygroup of the imperial familyfor the building, including a depiction of Lucius Verus as son of the emperor. See also Fuchs 1987, pp. 128-132. 178. Segesta:Schmidt 1982, p. 126. Rome: Schmidt 1982, p. 126, pl. 29:1-2. Aries:Fuchs 1987, p. 130, pl. 61:1-5.

98

ARCHITECTURAL

SCULPTURES ON THE FACADE

Stockholm.179 One of the smaller hairy silenoi from Athens wears a dinner wreath (another does not), several wear animal skins, but none appear to carry wineskins.180The silenos sleeping on a wineskin also appears as part of theater assemblages, a popular fountain figure in these buildings. They may occur as paired figures at either end of the pulpitum, at the back of the scaenae frons, or in the porticus post scaenam. The sculptural silenoi may have a combined sacred and theatral symbolism, for they are shown as if walking into the theater as part of a ritual procession before the dramatic activity begins, or sleeping, as if beside a spring. In either version they are symbolic of the Dionysiac thiasos and perhaps of the deity himself.181 In the Stibadeion on Delos, the two silenoi flank a statue of Dionysos or Apollo that is seated on a prohedria-like throne. In the Corinth Theater, the silenoi are restored in the third story flanking a statue of Hadrian. In A.D. 128 Hadrian is proclaimed Neos Dionysosin a decree referring to the theater of Ankyra, which makes this possible configuration at Corinth particularly striking.82 The Delian statues may reflect one from the 4th century B.C.,which is perhaps shown on a relief in St. Petersburg of 313 B.C.183This statue may have formed part of a choregic monument in Athens that theha was set up in manner of the Thrasyllos Monument overlooking the and it be the reflected theater, may by Karystios Monument as well. The Corinth Theater, similarly, may have the imagery of an Athenian choregic monument embedded in the figures of the third story. Indeed, the funding of the Corinth scaenae frons may have derived from a similar practice of civic euergetism.184 The Corinth silenoi can be associated with the Hadrianic phase of the Theater for reasons of style and technique. They are of marble similar to that of the Theater reliefs, a variety of Pentelic heavily veined with mica.185Obvious use of the drill is limited, occurring only in some of the hairy sections, as on the limbs or at the ankles, which recalls the limited use of the drill in the hair of some of the giants.186On both the silenoi and the reliefs, the deeper carving is on the outermost parts, while areas adjacent to the background are more shallowly carved. Use of the chisel is also restrained in both: witness the hair on the head of Silenos A (1lA) and the hair of the deities from the Gigantomachy reliefs.187The exaggerated modeling in the giants' cheeks is also comparable, as is the lack of carved details on the upper sides of hands where they would not be visible.188The arrangement of the lion's hair in regular rows is somewhat comparable to that of the Silenos's hairy parts.189Moreover, rendering of the eyes of 11Aand 12A, which have a prominent shelf for the lower lid, is similar to that of Trajan (1). In summary, the large number of analogous features indicates that the silenoi are of the same period, and that they were produced by the same workshop as other sculptures made for the scaenae frons.190 Carving of the Corinth silenoi does not precisely match any of their counterparts in Greece. The body hair is carved in higher relief and with more regular rows than that of the Hellenistic Delian statues, but it is less heavily cut than that of the standing silenoi in the Athens theater, 179. Athens: Herbig 1935, pp. 9-10, fig. 1, pl. 1. Despinis (2003, pp. 140-141, figs. 286, 287) hasjoined a head in Copenhagen onto this figure (see below, note 191). Paris, Louvre: Bulle 1928, p. 239; Schmidt-Colinet 1977, no. M 80; Schmidt 1982, p. 213, note 756. Stockholm: Reinach 1897-1930, I, p. 410, no. 1; Clarac 1841-1853, IV, no. 1725 A, pl. 721. 180. Herbig 1935, pp. 10-14, pls. 2-4. 181. Fuchs 1987, esp. pp. 141-142, examples in Rome, Minturnae, Leptis Magna, Augusta Emerita, Arles, and Caesarea Maritima. Caere: Fuchs, Liverani, and Santoro 1989, pp. 134135, silenoi of Early to mid-Augustan date; Kapossy 1969, pp. 30-38. For examples from Thessaloniki and Mytilene by an Attic workshop of Late Hadrianic and Early Antonine date, respectively, see ThessalonikiI,pp. 126-128, no. 97; Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1995. Ajootian (1993) associates the sleeping type with the story of Midas and Silenos, an image designed to allow people to enter the world of the silenos, so that the silenos becomes a link for mankind with the divine world.

182. On the Stibadeion, see Marcade 1969, pp. 184-190, 200-202; Bruneau 1970, pp. 299-304; Ridgway1990a, p. 239, note 6; and Cole 1993. For Hadrianas NeosDionysos,see Perret 1929, p. 31, note 1; SEGVI59; Pleket 1965, p. 336; Birley1997, p. 83; and Despinis 2003, p. 134, notes 348-350. 183. St. Petersburg:BrBr,pl. 785:b,with the lower half of a draped hairysilenos. 184. On the ThrasyllosMonument, see Travlos1971, pp. 562-565, from 320/19 B.c.; and Ridgway1990a, pp. 212-213, 239, note 5, the seated statueof Dionysosprobablyadded much later than either of the two phases of the monument. 185. Sturgeon in CorinthIX, ii, pp. 3-4, 14. 186. Cf. CorinthIX, ii, nos. G4, G12, G26. 187. Cf. CorinthIX, ii, nos. G5-1,G7-1,G1l-1. 188. Cf. CorinthIX, ii, no. G20-2,and 12E. 189. Cf. CorinthIX, ii, no. H5-1. 190. On the question of a workshop at Corinth, see above, pp. 22-25, and Sturgeon 1989.

SILENOS PIERS

99

which Despinis has dated to the Late Hadrianic period.l19 On the latter, the hair is rendered three-dimensionally as spiralswith abundant undercutting, creating strong chiaroscuro effects. This contrasts sharply with the flatter and softer treatment of the S-shaped waves on the Corinth

silenoi. A similar contrast can be seen on the colossal head of Pan in Copenhagen, from Athens, dated to the mid-2nd century A.c.192Rendering of the eyes and hair is analogous to that of Zeus and Apollo on the corner capitals of the Temple of Apollo at Didyma, which Pulz has dated to the Hadrianic period.193Such comparisons corroborate a Hadrianic date for the Corinth silenoi. 191. Delos: see note 168 above;the Delian figures also have less prominent modeling in the forehead and eyes. Athens: Despinis 2003, pp. 140-141. Cf. also the regularrowsof hair on a statuette from Akraiphiai:Heuzey 1884, pl. IX.

192. Copenhagen,DanishNationalMuseumABb 160,a little less than twice life-size:Riis 1974; Despinis 2003, pp. 140-141 on the date. 193. Pilz 1989, pp. 47-52, 136-137, 144-145.

7

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

he large number of freestanding sculptures of approximately the same scale and marble as ours and their comparable arrangements in other Roman theaters and nymphaea make it likely that some of the statues found in the Corinth Theater were set up between the columns of the scaenae frons. The reconstruction presented below, however, is proposed with the caveat that it is only one possible reconstruction. Given the fragmentary remains of the sculptures and the building, and the incomplete excavation records, we cannot be sure how many statues once stood between the columns or on the stage, and the identifications of the sculptures presented are often, of necessity, tentative. In addition, in many cases the initial place of display is not certain, only that the sculpture was on or in the Theater at the time of the building's destruction. The presentation here attempts to make sense of the individual pieces and of their meaning in this architectural context. The number of sculptures preserved suggests that statues were set up between columns only on the first story. Because of the doors opening onto rooms at each end of the stage building and because of the limited visibility of the far ends of the facade, sculptures may have been displayed in only some of the intercolumniations in the side wings when the Hadrianic assemblage was first composed. Others may have been added later. A further consideration in the attempt to reconstruct the original assemblage is the question of the original location of two horses found in the structure (13, 23). Since neither horse is likely to have fit in the intercolumniations, they have been placed at the far ends of the stage. Each horse was probably set up together with a human companion, such as 24, who could have stood with it either on the stage or between columns. Visibility of any figure in the intercolumniations at the extreme ends of the facade would have been limited from many vantage points, which may have influenced decisions regarding the sculptures' placement. Using findspots as indicators of the original location of the preserved sculptures, we can infer that the sections nearest the center held the figures of most importance in Corinth: in the westcentral section, Aphrodite (15), Hermes(?) (16), Athena (17), and Artemis(?) (18); and in the eastern section, two athletes, the Monteverde youth (19) and the Doryphoros (20), Pan(?) (21), and Herakles (22). Probably to be seen as part of the same assemblage are the figures in the wings: at west, a Dioskouros with a horse (13) and an imperial portrait, possibly Hadrian (14); and at east, the seated Chiron (23) with a young musician (?) (24). Two figures made of different marble may have been added to this basic assemblage at a somewhat later date: Antinous as Apollo in Lykeios pose (25) and Dionysos in Kitharoidos format (26). These two may have stood in the opening of the porta regia.

WEST WING (13, 14) 13

Horse (with Dioskouros)

P1. 26

P1. 26:a 13A Chest and foreleg S-923. Theater, tr. 34, from west-central stage, probably 1908.

P.L. 0.850, W. across front 0.174, D. 0.365, p.L. leg 0.380 m. Three joining fragments; horse broken around haunch and through leg above knee. The neck and head section was separately attached.

102

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

13B Fragmentary horse leg, rear left(?) P1. 26:b S-3689-6. Museum marble pile, probably Theater excavations of 1920s. P.L. 0.178, W. 0.116, Th. 0.159 m. Single fragment; leg broken on both ends. Surface worn. 13C Horse foreleg P1. 26:c, d S-3593. Museum basement marble pile, probably from Shear's Theater excavations. P.L. 0.253, W. 0.069-0.073, p.Th. 0.077 m. Twojoining fragments; leg broken at both ends. Missing a long chip at back, smaller chips from lower break; worn, weathered. 13D Horse leg P1. 26:e S-3592. Museum basement marble pile, probably from Shear's Theater excavations. P.L. 0.368, W. 0.060-0.099, Th. 0.080-0.117 m. Two joining fragments; leg broken near ankle and knee. Surface chipped, weathered. 13A-D: Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic.

These four pieces have been grouped as part of one horse because of their similar material, life-size scale, and condition. 13A depicts a portion of the left chest and foreleg. The chest is realistically modeled; folds of flesh lead into the leg, on which veins and bone are depicted. Outer surfaces are smoothed. A shallow, sharp hole in the middle of a low, circular depression at the center front may be a measuring point. The joining surface for the neck and head section is dressed with a claw chisel, but not as finely prepared as the arm 37. 13B is probably the left hind leg from a standing horse. The skin is lightly textured, each side differentiated. The inside is nearly flat, the back and outer left more smoothly finished, the front quite rough. A vein is curved diagonally across the back. The thickness and the outward flare at the top indicate that this is a rear leg rather than a foreleg. 13C presents a section of the horse's foreleg, including part of the hairy fetlock. Despite weathering, the modeled surface reveals a raised diagonal vein crossing the bone. 13D shows a portion of the horse's lower leg, with roughened surface and veins. Since the right side is rougher, the left probably faced out, making this the left fore- or perhaps rear leg.' Roman.

These four pieces derive from a standing statue of a horse with the weight on the straight, left foreleg, rather than from a protome statue support. Although identified here as a horse, the preserved fragments might be imagined as a centaur. The figure was probably standing rather than seated like Chiron (23), to judge from the best-preserved segment (13A), in which the leg forms a straight line with the torso and the leg muscles are tensed to indicate that they are supporting the animal. As the largest piece (13A) was found in the west-central section of the stage-building-stage area, and not in an open space like the Peristyle Court or East Theater Plaza, it is unlikely that it formed part of an equestrian monument mounted on a gate or arch.2

A full-length horse might have stood next to or supported one of the Dioskouroi, like the standing figures from the Fountain of Juturna in the Forum Romanum or on the Capitoline Hill.3 Statues of the Dioskouroi found in the area of the stage of the Leptis Magna theater are shown with protomes.4 The Capitoline monument presents the best freestanding parallel, suggesting that the Dioskouros here would have stood at the horse's right facing toward center stage, probably at the left end of the stage or within the opening to the west hospitalium. A relief from Sparta shows a comparable configuration.5 The Dioskouroi are popular in the Peloponnese, especially in Lakonia, and reliefs dedicated to them have also been found at Corinth.6 Another figure commonly associated with a horse and appropriate to Corinth would be Bellerophon, with Pegasos standing next to him. Bellerophon 1. A further piece, S-3598, which may derive from this figure, is stored in the Museum. 2. Note, for instance, the gate which stood at the juncture of the two paved streetsnortheastof the Theater (Williamsand Zervos 1983, pp. 8-11), which might have supported a dedicatory monument. 3. Forum: Nash 1962, s.v. Lacus Iuturnae,figs. 681, 682; Coarelli 1974, p. 77 top, detail of head, late 2nd century B.C.; LIMCIII, p. 617, no. 56, s.v.Dioscuri/Castores (Gury);Geppert 1996, p. 166, no. P 69. Capitoline:LIMCIII,p. 617, no. 57, s.v. Dioscuri/Castores (Gury); Geppert 1996, pp. 41, 155, no. P 31, pls. 1, 2, Appendix pl. 7, ca. A.D. 120. More generally,see Markman 1943;Anderson 1961; Horsesof San Marco,esp. pp. 15-45,

figs. 40, 41, for good illustrations of bronze equestrian statues in Naples. 4. Bianchi Bandinelli et al. 1966, pp. 81-83, pls. 75, 77, 78; Caputo and Traversari 1976, nos. 7, 8, pls. 6-8, perhaps Hadrianic. 5. Sanders 1993, pp. 218-219, fig. 2, Sparta Museum 291; at Sparta the Dioskouroi are associated with ritualized contests as well as with Roman soldiers, both of which may have meaning for Corinth in the absence of a major cult. 6. For Lakonian reliefs from the Roman period, see Sanders 1993. From Corinth, S-2542 from the west and southwest areas of the Forum: Ridgway 1981b, p. 441, note 76; from Dervenaki, S-2803: Ridgway 1981b, p. 441.

WEST WING

103

and Pegasos appear on Corinthian coins of the 2nd to 3rd century, but thus far no wings have been detected in association with this horse.7 The unemphatic modeling of the musculature and the lack of emphasis on sinews and veins here may indicate a Classicalrather than Hellenistic prototype, or may result from the generalizing tendency of the Roman artist.8 Contrast, for example, the more prominent rendering of muscles and veins on the standing forelegs and withers of the bronze horse of Marcus Aurelius in Rome on the Capitoline Hill and on the marble equestrian monument from the Villa Barberini at Castle Gandolfo.9 Although no figure can definitely be associated with the horse, either a Dioskouros or a portrait would be possible. 14

Nude standing male with cloak, Hadrian (?)

Pls. 27, 28

Bibliography: Shear 1926, p. 462 (no illustration), where associated with the Doryphoros head and legs (20).

14A Left arm with mantle P1. 27:a, b S-3548. Forearm section: Theater, probably northwest of the west hospitalium, in 5i, 1928 (Corinth NB 321, p. 534). Upper arm and curved drapery section: Museum marble pile. Joined 1993. P.L. 0.680, W. 0.110, Th. 0.150, p.L. upper arm 0.320; dowel cutting: W. 0.015, D. 0.040 m. Three joining fragments; arm broken beneath the shoulder, drapery through the curved area behind the elbow and near the bottom of the hanging section; the hand was attached near the wrist. Folds are missing some

14E Right foot on plinth P1. 28:b, c T-144/marble pile no. 168. Theater, eastern stage, section 10g/3-4a, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 359). P.L. 0.390, p.H. 0.166, L. foot 0.185, W. foot 0.100, W. support 0.182, H. plinth 0.054 m. Threejoining fragments; leg broken above ankle, foot missing toes; edge of plinth preserved to right of foot. Front surface contains root marks.

chips.

These five pieces are associated based on similarities of marble, over life-size scale, and technique. The male statue, which stood with its weight on its right foot, wears a mantle that was wrapped around the left arm and probably rested on the left shoulder. 14A represents the draped left arm from this statue, which is comparable in scale to the two mantle statues from the Theater (2, 68) and the complete statue from theJulian Basilica (S-1065), which stands 2.0 m high. The arm is bent with forearm extended. The drapery on the left shoulder probably extended close to the line of the break. The hand was attached separately near the wrist by a dowel, the joint masked by drapery over the forearm held horizontal to the torso. The joining surface is roughly dressed with a heavy claw chisel or a point (unlike that of S-1065, which is very smooth). Most of the arm is smoothed, although long, sharp rasping remains over the back. The left hand (14B) wears a ring and holds an object resembling part of a sword and its handle, the flat blade projecting at the back of the hand and the thicker, cylindrical haft projecting between thumb and index finger. The weapon, which by analogy with other sword-holding statues was probably sheathed, is held loosely, with the thumb and first finger extended forward. The object is more likely to represent a sword than a spear, be-

14B Left hand holding sword P1. 27:c, d T-166. Theater, cavea, section VI, 1.0 m above orchestra level, probably 1926. P.L. 0.232, W. 0.130, Th. 0.072; dowel: p.L. 0.025, W. 0.014 m. Single fragment; hand missing chips from thumb and fingers, both ends of the weapon are broken. None of the preparedjoining surface survives. 14C Right arm P1. 27:e S-3759. Museum marble pile, marked "etep," so it is from Shear's Theater excavations. P.L. 0.413; W. upper arm 0.108, Th. 0.137; est. H. 1.952.05 m. Six joining fragments. Arm missing chips from surface at breaks; not weathered. P1. 28:a 14D Left foot T-234/Sc. 13. Theater, central cavea, section VIII, 1.0 m above orchestra level, 1926. W. 0.105, H. plinth 0.050, L. foot 0.295, H. wedge under foot 0.082, W. ankle break 0.074 m. Two joining fragments; foot broken above ankle. Instep and toes chipped, encrusted. 7. Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner [1885-1887] 1964, p. 13, nos. 25-29, pl. C, where Bellerophon is depicted leading, taming, catching, and watering Pegasos. Cf. also the Late Antique relief of Pegasos and Bellerophon on the frieze from the Basilica at Aphrodisias (Smith 1996, pp. 54-56). 8. Cf. the legs of bronze horses from, e.g., the Delphi Charioteer group (Chamoux in FdDTV,v, pls. 3, 4), and the marble horses from the Antikytherawreck (Bol 1972, pp. 84-93, pls. 50-56).

14A-E: Marble, white, fine to medium grained; probably Pentelic.

9. Rome: Helbig4,II, no. 1161; Roques de Maumont 1958, 55, p. fig. 29. Castle Gandolfo: Roques de Maumont 1958, p. 54, fig. 28:a; Horsesof San Marco,fig. 46 (pieced horizontally, 2nd century A.C.), and pp. 25-26, following Magi 1971-1972, pp. 214, 215, note 7. Cf. also marble horses from Lanuvium (built in sections) and Melos:Coarelli 1981, esp. p. 237, fig. 49, for Melos group; Libertini 1952-1954, p. 371 on date, second half 2nd century B.C.

104

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

The front of the forearm preserves a thick crust of cause the fingers are positioned differently than in replicas of the Doryphoros,and a swordis a more appropri- light red color (2.5YR 6/6). The upper arm has a stain that appears to be a pale version of this, mistakenly reate weapon for a portrait.10The hand was attached to moved in cleaning. This color is very similar to that prethe arm above the wristby a round iron dowel, the joint served on theJulio-Claudian mantle statue (2). This arm masked by a mantle crossing the forearm. The basic but are the is too well finished to go with the Doryphoros (20). It is are veins not modeled over indicated, shapes back of the hand, nor is the ulna clearly defined, as if more comparable in quality of carving and has about these areaswould not have been seen. Long, sharpmarks the same width at the elbow and similar tooling on the from a rasp or scraper remain over the inner surfaces. back surfaces as 14A. The lower side of the back of the hand forms a ridge, as 14D depicts the bare left foot from the statue. This if to keep the hand from appearing markedlyseparated foot belongs to the free leg, which is pulled back to rest from the figure, and perhaps indicates that some final on the ball; the instep and heel are supported by a consmoothing was done after the hand was attached. Marks tinuous wedge and the ankle leans to the right.14 The from a heavy,blunt instrument show that the hand was modeling is generalized, lacking veins. The big toe is shorter and wider than the others, the second is longer. intentionally broken from the statue, probablyto obtain the metal pin. Nails are rendered and creases of the toes marked. Flat a Classical Diomedes carries chisel work separates the toes, which were then smoothed Among statuarytypes, with the rasp. No drill marks are visible in the separation sword,but actively,in the right hand, with the point forward." Here a seal ring is worn on the fourth finger, a between the plinth or wedge and the large toe or the feature not usuallyassociatedwith Greekidealizingstatu- foot. Most surfaces have been brought to a careful, ary, but common in both male and female portraits.12 smoothed finish, although a few faint marks from a sharp The hand belongs to a figure on the same scale as the rasp or scraper remain at the ankle and across the instatues of Augustus and "Lucius"Caesarfrom the Julian step. The foot extends to the edge of the plinth, which Basilica and the Augustus(?) from the Theater (2). A itself is rounded and dressed with a point. The heel is raised high, indicating that the left leg sheathed sword, loosely held in the left hand, is found was pulled back in an Argive stance. The foot, however, on imperial portraitsin varieddress, as, for example, the cannot be associated with the legs of the Doryphoros, as cuirassed statue of Marcus Aurelius in Alexandria Shear had originally thought, because the width at the and the shoulder-mantlestatue possibly of Pupienus in breaks does not match, and rasp marks here have been the Louvre.13The hand is of appropriate scale, marble, smoothed from visible surfaces. Nor does this foot begeneralization, and discoloration to be associated with 14A, but too much of the wrist is shown for it to be aslong to 68, the Antonine mantle statue, which would have had a left foot in a similar position; on 68, the break sociated with 2. The sharp rasping over the inner surfaces also corresponds to that over the back of the arm occurs just at the forward turn of the ankle and through the ankle bones, and the break measures W. 0.085, D. of 14A. Moreover,the hand's findspot in cavea VI is dithat of the 0.115 of northeast west 14A, m, indicating a somewhat taller statue. This leg, rectly opposite hospitalium. then, provides evidence of an additional statue in the 14C preserves the upper part of the biceps to the Polykleitan tradition or an imperial portrait, probably middle of the forearm of the undraped right arm that just over life-size. Association with 14E, a right foot on a would have hung loosely at the side of the statue. The plinth, is uncertain because of the absence of toes in that is for a male The piece. strong modeling appropriate figure. Marks from a heavy hammer running parallel to the front surfaces are carefully smoothed, the back retains from in break marks a or a at the base of the ankle indicate that the statue short, scraper sharp rasp crossing was intentionally broken up. If the work of breaking statstrokes. 10. Compare the reconstruction of the Polykleitan Doryphoros in Munich (Arias 1964, pls. 46, 47) and the left hands of the Naples and Vatican copies (Arias 1964, pls. 30, 31 [Naples], 37 [Vatican]). The object held in the Corinth hand does not resemble the base for a torch: contrast the statuette of a torch-bearer in Athens, NM 3631 (Rhomiopoulou 1997, pp. 34-35, no. 21; Zanker 1974, p. 29, pl. 31:4, 5, though possibly not antique), and the marble torch from Isthmia (Isthmia IV, no. 122). 11. Fuchs 1983, fig. 83; LIMC III, pp. 401-402, no. 32, s.v. DiomedesI (Boardman, Vafopoulou-Richardson), red-figure cup in Oxford (ARV2 1516, no. 1, 400-390 B.C.); no. 34, gem in Boston, MFA, ca. 400 B.c.; Zanker 1974, pl. 79:2; Lippold 1950, p. 184, note 2, pl. 48:4; Helbig4, II, no. 2096. Other active sword-wielders recorded in Greece include statues of Brutus and Cassius, set up in the Athenian Agora next to the Tyrannicides (Dio Cass. 47.20.4). 12. Contrast replicas of the Doryphoros in which hands are preserved: Arias 1964, pls. 31, 35-37. For the ring, cf. Higgins 1980, pp. 182-185, pl. 64, esp. D, for a sampling of Roman fin-

ger rings. The shape is similar to the solid-cast gold ring in Brooklyn; see Davidson and Oliver 1984, p. 158, no. 218, dated 1st to 3rd century A.C. Unfortunately, hands are frequently missing, but see, e.g., Linfert 1976, figs. 130, 147, for two male portraits from Kos in Rhodes, and figs. 321, 322, for the female portrait from Stratoni in Polygyros. A number of other hands at Corinth are ringed and hold swords: S-1084 (Corinth IX, p. 80, no. 142); S-1058, S-1093, and S-1095 (unpublished). For an example at Olympia, see Bol 1984, pl. 22:A. 13. Niemeyer 1968, no. 60, pl. 21:1, Marcus Aurelius; no. 126, pl. 47, Pupienus(?), parts of sword, finger restored. 14. The "Argive" stance, with free leg pulled back, is often effected in marble replicas through the support of such a wedge, although not all copies possess this trait. Cf. the Polykleitan Doryphoros (Arias 1964, pls. 31, 35, wedge under 1. foot) and Diadoumenos (pls. 71, 73, 74, wedge under 1. foot). Barefoot imperial portraits frequently adopt this stance; cf. Primaporta Augustus (Niemeyer 1968, no. 36, pl. 10:2), Tiberius in Leiden (no. 75, pl. 24:2), and Claudius in the Vatican and in Olympia (nos. 95, 96, pls. 34:1, 2).

WEST WING

ues apart was done in the orchestra, the sculpture may previouslyhave stood on the stage. 14E represents the bare right foot standing flat on the plinth. The front half of the foot is undercut from the plinth ca. 0.02 m at left. The calf leans to proper right, so this is probablythe weight leg, with the balance slightlyon the outside of the foot. The modeling is clear and careful, the anklebones sharplydifferentiated. The front of the foot is smoothed, the sides and back rasped. Part of an undecorated cylindricalsupport, presumably a tree, standsto the back and right of the foot. The plinth top preserves claw- and flat-chisel marks, with some heavierpoint workbetween the foot and support.A point wasused on the edges, a heavierpoint on the underside. The support is shaped at back with a flat chisel in short, irregularstrokes,but the front is more smoothlyfinished.

105

The support is similarto the support in 18, which is also broken near the base. In addition, the height and rounded shape of the plinth are similarto the plinths of some other statuesfrom the Theater,such as 3B (a lower torso) and probably39B (a leg). The mantle folds over the arm are varied in height and width. Most outer surfacesare tubular,but the sides of some appear to be nicked. The highest folds are undercut, and most channels are fairly straight and deep with straight sides. The front folds are more varied in depth and width than those in the rear,which are flatter and sketchier.An incised crease near the bottom of the mantle's lowest edge suggests the selvage edge. The lowest 0.03 m are painted a deep reddishyellow (7.5YR7/8). Hadrianic(?).

These pieces, associated on grounds of similarities in material, size, and technique, derive from a standing male statue, carrying a heavy cloak. The figure was represented in heroic nudity, with the cloak presumably gathered on the left shoulder and wrapped around the left forearm to hang to the level of the knees. This type echoes the Hermes Richelieu type of the mid-4th century B.C. and the more muscular Diomedes of the late 5th century B.C., both of which are adapted in Hellenistic and Roman times for depictions of real personages-such as Ofellius Ferus on Delos from ca. 100 B.C.15and Corinth S-1065, "Gaius"Caesar.16In contrast to the more complete "Gaius,"the hanging segment here is wrapped more tightly around the arm, appears to be shorter, and lacks the incised edge and tassels. It may, therefore, represent a shorter paludamentum rather than the heavier, longer version. Instead of being incised, the fringe here was painted. The type and style of drapery point to a Roman date.17 Analogies with cloaks worn by the cuirassed statue of Hadrian on Thasos of ca. A.D. 125 and by a statue from the Nymphaeum of Herodes Atticus in Olympia of ca. A.D. 150 point to the Hadrianic to Early Antonine period, in general.'8 Further, the folds here are much more irregular than the hanging folds of 68 from the mid-Antonine period, which 14 appears to precede. The Theater statue did not wear a tunic or cuirass, for the entire upper arm is bare, so the figure would have been nude except for the cloak, which is common for heroic or imperial subjects. A close parallel for the drapery arrangement and stance indicated here is found in a heroic nude statue from Ostia that has been interpreted as a depiction of Hadrian.19 In fact, a number of statues that depict Hadrian, which appear to have been made during his lifetime, have this configuration. The portrait of Hadrian from Vaison was also set up in a theater. Further, the portrait from the library of the Asklepieion at Pergamon has a support in the form of a cuirass, strengthening the military association of the paludamentum and sword that the emperor carries in 14, which are also seen in the Pergamon figure (PI. 28:d).2O Presumably the nudity conveys the association of forthcoming divinity, though without any necessary indication of cult. 15. Hermes Richelieu: LIMC V, p. 367, no. 946a, s.v. Hermes (Siebert). Ofellius: Delos 13, p. 21, fig. 13; Smith 1991, fig. 316. 16. S-1065: CorinthIX, pp. 72-74, no. 135; de Grazia 1973, no. 11; Pollini 1987, pl. 2; Maderna 1988, pp. 74-78, 236-238, note 1, after Diomedes Cumae/Munich type. See also, e.g., the cuirassed statue of Augustus from the theater at Cherchel (Niemeyer 1968, no. 38, pl. 12:2; Stemmer 1978, no. I 5) and a cuirassed statue of Trajan in Ostia (Niemeyer 1968, no. 49, pl. 16; Stemmer 1978, no. I 10). For portraits of Hadrian nude with a shoulder mantle, see those from the theater at Vaison (Niemeyer 1968, no. 110, pl. 41) and from the nymphaeum on the Larissa at Argos, with sword (Marcade and Raftopoulou 1963, pp. 49-52, no. 53, figs. 16, 17). The shoulder mantle arrangement also occurs at Corinth in a statue from the South

Basilica,S-1973;see de Grazia1973, p. 327, no. 106. 17. Oehler 1961, p. 75; Maderna 1988. 18. Thasos: Stemmer 1978, no. VI 21. Olympia, inv. 149: Stemmer 1978, no. IV 7, possibly Lucius Verus;Bol 1984, pp. 194-195, no. 51, pls. 66, 67. 19. OstiaV,pp. 107-108, no. 184, pl. 104; complete except for the head, H. 2.10 m, possiblyof Greek marble. 20. Vaison:Wegner 1956, pp. 115-116, pl. 14:a, associated with Hadrian'strip to Gaulin A.D. 121 and 122;Niemeyer 1968, p. 110, no. 110, pl. 41, H. 2.10 m; Maderna 1988, pp. 201-202, no. D 7, pl. 20:2. Pergamon:Wegner 1956, p. 105, pl. 14:b, associatedwith Hadrian'svisitto Pergamonin A.D. 123;Niemeyer 1968, p. 110, no. 111, H. ca. 2.30 m, complete; Maderna1988, pp. 202-203, no. D 8.

106

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

The closest comparison geographically is the colossal statue that once stood in the central niche of the nymphaeum on the Larissa at Argos. The nymphaeum is dated by epigraphical evidence to A.D. 124 and is associated with Hadrian's trip to the Argolid in the fall of that year.21 A statue in this format was also found in the nymphaeum at Perge, which is dated to ca. A.D. 130 on the basis of its pierced eyes. Since a cuirassed portrait of Hadrian was set up in the same building at Perge, there should be no difficulty in supposing that two statues of the same emperor could have been set up in the Corinth Theater.22A cuirassed statue of Hadrian has been reconstructed in the central, third-story aedicula of the scaenae frons (4). The portraits of Hadrian with shoulder mantle attest the popularity and apparent versatility of this type. The Vaison, Argos, and Perge sculptures wear wreaths, suggesting that the Corinth figure could have as well. Since this statue isjust over life-size, it appears to be on approximately the same scale as 68, the Antonine mantle statue from the Peristyle Court, and it would have measured about 0.80 m in width. It reasonably can be restored on the scaenae frons in the space that is about 1.0 m wide, between the right column and the right curve of the western hospitalium. WEST CENTRAL (15-18) 15

Head of Aphrodite Pls. 29, 30, 34:c T-246/Sc. 16. Theater, western orchestra, before stage, 0.66 m above orchestra level, 1926. P.H. 0.343, D. 0.252, L. forehead to chin 0.192, W. at temples 0.240, W. face at cheekbones 0.155, W. neck 0.138, D. neck 0.135 m. Single fragment; broken through base of neck, missing front of nose, upper lid, forehead, left cheek, chin, and right ear. Chipped on right brow, front hair is weathered and abraded. Red pigment in hair (10R 5/8 to 3/6); light brown on face (7.5YR 5/6). Bibliography: Shear 1926, pp. 462-463, pl. VI; Carpenter 1928, p. 76, no. 15; Reutersward 1960, p. 203, who notes the red; Richter 1965, I, pp. 70-72, s.v. Sappho, where it is listed as an uncertain representation; Schwingenstein 1977, p. 68, perhaps Sappho; Karanastassis 1986, pp. 264-267, 291, pl. 70:2-4; Delivorrias 1995, p. 216, note 51; Sturgeon 1998a. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. This approximately life-size female head presents a long, rounded-oval form. The head, turned to proper right, is slightly inclined to the right. In front view, the left contour is clearer than the right, the right cheek sloping back more sharply, but this feature is not evident in

the optimum view from three-quarter left. The hair, centrally parted, covers most of the ears, and is bound by a sakkos at the nape. Around the face, strands twist in an irregular manner. Groups of strands are lightly separated, but drillwork and sharp chisel work are absent. The long upper eyelids project out and down, while the short lower lids are unarticulated, making a smooth transition to the cheeks. The right lid, preserved to its original length beside the nose, is wider than the left. The eyeballs tilt forward at the top. The brows, characterized by soft, definite ridges, form graceful curves; the nose has gradually sloping sides. The lips are fleshy and somewhat open, the lower lip fuller than the upper. "Venus rings" are rendered in the neck with shallow modeling. The head is evenly finished on all sides, the surfaces carefully smoothed. The hair is strongly colored by red pigment, but there is no sign of gilding. Red also survives outlining the eyes and inside the mouth and nostrils, and it was presumably used for the lips as well. A light-brown color, which may be traces of pigment, survives on some facial surfaces. Hadrianic.

This striking head of a woman possesses an aura of calm dignity in its downward look and heavilylidded eyes. The air of nobility and cautious restraintseems designed to evoke the ideals of the classical past. The piece is impressive for its demeanor as well as for its inherent beauty. The major interpretive problems concern the subject, prototype, and date. The head was identified at the time of discoveryas a copy of the bronze statue of Sappho by Silanion, but it does not have much in common with other statues that have been associatedwith that literary figure, which include the Aphrodite "Sappho/Olympias" type of the 5th century 21. Marcade and Raftopoulou 1963, pp. 49-52, no. 53, figs. 16-17, p.H. base of neck to upper right calf 1.93 m; Walker 1979, pp. 97-106, fig. 30; Maderna 1988, p. 220, no. UD 8,

pl. 25:1. 22. Perge: Inan and Alfoldi-Rosenbaum1979, pp. 95-97, no. 45, pls. 38:1, 39:2, 40:1-2; no. 46, pl. 38:2.

WEST CENTRAL

107

B.C.and the 4th-centuryB.C.type more appropriatelyassociated with Silanion.23In fact, there is little evidence for the appearance of Sappho, who wrote in the first half of the 6th century B.C.24

The subject of the Theater sculpture would have been apparent in its formal characteristics, coiffure, and attributes, of which no trace survives.Key features are the unusual width of the eyelids and the inclined position of the head, which together give an impression of modesty as is associated with figures like the Mourning Penelope.25The symmetricalarrangement of the hair and the sakkos that encloses it at the nape are also diagnostic features, common in the 5th century.A sakkoscan cover nearly the whole head, as on the Deidameia from the west pediment of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia, the Fleeing Niobid in Copenhagen, the Nike from the pediment of the Temple of Apollo Sosianos in Rome, and the Kore Albani;26it can, alternatively, coverjust the nape, as on later figures like the Hera Borghese and "Frejus"or Louvre/Naples Aphrodite types.27Athenian votive reliefs and gravestelai present both nymphs and women wearing this headdress.28 That the sakkos as arranged here continues into the 4th century B.C. is evidenced by some grave reliefs and by votive reliefs to Asklepios and Hygieia, though the fashion seems to have declined in popularity after the 5th century B.C.29

The Corinth head resembles a piece in Rome that La Rocca has associated with the Louvre/ Naples Aphrodite type.30The Theater sculpture, however,has a longer face, narrowerchin, and softer mouth than this figure. In addition, the hair arrangement differs in a few details. On the Louvre/Naples type, the hair is raised to expose the ears, from which hang disk earrings,and the sakkos,which disappears above the ears as it narrows,is gathered into five sections, an arrangement seemingly characteristicof careful versions of this type. On the Corinth head, on the other hand, the hair covers all but the lower tips of the ears, which are unadorned. Where the sakkos disappears into the middle of the hair mass on the sides, it is divided into only two sections, more

logically than in the Louvre/Naples type. Hence, although the Corinth head appears to be related to the Louvre/Naples type, it displays a number of differences that may indicate that it is a

variation on this type or that it stems from a different prototype of related meaning and not too distant date. The Louvre/Naples type has been interpreted as deriving from a bronze statue in Athens of ca. 420-410 B.C.,possibly by Kallimachos.31The more elongated facial proportions, triangularforehead, narrowereyes, and shorter mouth of the Theater head suggest a later model, and the configuration of the hair may point to a different place of origin. 23. Shear (1926, pp. 462-463) called it a copy of Silanion's statue. On the Aphrodite "Sappho/Olympias"type see Vierneisel-Schl6rb 1979, no. 10; Delivorrias 1978, pls. 1-14, the Aphrodite by Kalamis;Harrison 1984, esp. p. 379, note 2, for bibliography; Goette 1986, pp. 711-712, fig. l:a-d; Despinis (1988, p. 69) thinksit is Hygieia.On the so-calledSilanion type, see Vierneisel-Schl6rb1979, no. 37; Heintze 1966. 24. Richter 1965, I, p. 70. 25. Lippold 1950, p. 134, fig. 3, pl. 47; LIMCI,pp. 351-353, no. 1, s.v.AidosI (Eckstein). 26. Deidameia, Figure H: Lippold 1950, p. 121, pl. 45:3. Niobid: La Rocca 1985, p. 73, pl. 42, figs. 25, 26. SosianosNike: La Rocca 1985, pls. 4-6, fig. 8:a. KoreAlbani:La Rocca 1985, p. 63, fig. 6; Bieber 1977, fig. 543; Bol 1989-1998, IV, pp. 205222, no. 460, pls. 125-131. 27. Hera Borghese: details of the head Ny CarlsbergGlyptotek 247 in Despinis 1971, pp. 156-158, pls. 113-115; LIMC dated ca. 420IV,p. 671, no. 102, s.v.Hera(Kossatz-Deissmann), 410 B.C., identified as Aphrodite from the slipped strap;Landwehr 1985, pp. 88-94, Aphrodite, with list of replicas;Delivorrias 1993, 1995. On the "Polykleitan"Hera, see Ridgway1995, p. 194. "Frejus"Aphrodite: LIMCII, pp. 33-35, nos. 225-240, s.v.Aphrodite (Delivorrias);LaRocca 1972-1973;Karouzou1974;

Bieber 1977, pp. 46-47, figs. 124-157; Ridgway1981a, pp. 198200; Brinke 1991; Katakis2002, pp. 51-53, no. 51. 28. See, e.g., the relief to the nymphs,Athens, NM 1329, of ca. 410 B.C. (Karouzou 1968, p. 60; Travlos 1971, fig. 192:a; Edwards1985, no. 1). See also the grave stele of Hegeso, Athens, NM 3624 (Clairmont,CAT2.150),and the relief ofa young woman in Peiraieus,ArchaeologicalMuseum2555 (Clairmont, CAT1.761). 29. Graverelief of Theano with sakkos (ca. 380 B.C.), Athens, NM 3472:Karouzou1968, p. 83; Clairmont,CAT2.206.Cf. also DarSag 3, 2, pp. 812-816, s.v. kekryphalos; pp. 1955-1956, s.v. mitra;Brandenburg 1966; and T6lle-Kastenbein1977. 30. Rome, Capitoline Museums, Museo Nuovo 2392: La Rocca 1972-1973; LIMCII, p. 35, no. 230, s.v. Aphrodite(Delivorrias);Helbig4,II, p. 478, no. 1690. 31. See LIMCII,p. 34, s.v.Aphrodite (Delivorrias),for a summary of variousviews;the identification of the prototype and, hence, of the depicted aspect of Aphrodite is problematic.For a small head of Louvre/Naples type found in the Gymnasium at Corinth and similar to the Theater head, cf. S-71-38.Here also, half of the ear is covered and the eyes and mouth are narrow,but the sakkoshas the wide band; I thankJ. Wiseman for permission to mention this piece.

108

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

The so-called Hera Borghese of ca. 420-410 B.C. presents a comparable coiffure, although differences in arrangement and rendering also exist here.32 Unlike the Corinth piece, the hair is pushed up over the ears, the ties of the sakkos are visible behind the forehead hair, and the head faces the opposite direction. Moreover, the head is shorter than the Corinth piece's, the sakkos set higher on the neck, and the face approximates a rounded rectangle rather than an oval. In addition, individual strands of hair are incised, rather than raised in relief as on the Corinth piece. Like the Louvre/Naples Aphrodite, the Hera Borghese type is associated with post-Parthenonian artists working in Athens, and it too may represent Aphrodite.33 The consistency of these two types in certain details, such as the uncovering of the ear, may indicate that the Corinth piece, on which the ears are mostly covered, derives from a non-Athenian artistic sphere. The full cheeks and square chin evident in our piece's profile bear some analogy to those of the Doryphoros from the Corinth Theater (20), though the latter has a different treatment in other features and in finish. The general similarity may suggest affinities with works of Polykleitos or his followers. Polykleitos himself, however, is credited with relatively few statues of women, and few statues of female subjects by other Peloponnesian artists are datable to this period. The Aphrodite head's underlying rectangular structure is modified by diminished emphasis on the frontal plane and greater stress given to continuous curves along horizontal and vertical planes. Contrast, for example, the horizontal sections of the heads of 19 and 20, taken above the eyebrows and below the nose (PI. 30:d). Other details, like the way the hair puffs out from about the face, the heavily-lidded eyes, and the soft, somewhat sensuously opened mouth, find analogies in heads from the Argive Heraion pediment of ca. 400 B.C., from the frieze of the Bassai temple of ca. 400-390 B.C., and from the pediments of the temple at Mazi of ca. 390 B.C.34Further, the Theater head is similar to a terracotta statue of a young male votary from Corinth of ca. 420 B.C. with regard to basic head shape and facial features.35 Thus, although concrete evidence is lacking, the sculpture may reflect inspiration from a non-Attic, possibly Peloponnesian artistic tradition.

Karanastassis has suggested that the Corinth piece is one of the few replicas of the Aphrodite Doria-Pamphili type of ca. 420-410 B.C., a sculpture somewhat similar to the Louvre/Naples Aphrodite.36 In some ways the heads are alike, that is, in the facial shapes and the turn to the right. The hair framing the face of the Doria Aphrodite, however, is rendered with a much stronger separation into bunches and, more significantly, the back hair is rolled up over a fillet, not contained in a sakkos, and the ears are more exposed. Karanastassis explains the presence of the sakkos on the Corinth head as a simplification allowed by its placement against a wall or in a niche of the scaenae frons. This interpretation is problematic for two reasons. First, the back of the Corinth work is brought to a carefully finished state, especially when contrasted with the Doryphoros. Thus, regardless of where it was to be set up, the artist has not taken a reductive approach to the back, such as can be seen in other sculptures at Corinth.37 Second, the date of carving of the Corinth sculpture, in Hadrianic times (see below, p. 110), might suggest that it provides a more Classical adaptation of a prototype than is shown by the Doria Aphrodite, which is dated to the Claudian to Neronian period.38 Despite rejection of the Doria Aphrodite type as the model, the resemblance of the Corinth head to that type, its parallels with the Louvre/Naples Aphrodite and Hera Borghese types (the 32. See note 27 above. 33. Landwehr 1985, pp. 88-94. 34. I have discussed this issue at greater length in Sturgeon 1998a, pp. 228-229. See, e.g., Argos, Athens, NM 1562: Argive Heraeum I, pp. 148-153, pl. 32:4. Bassai: Bassitas II, p. 105, no. 41, pl. 13; p. 110, no. 79, pl. 24; p. 115, no. 169, pl. 52; p. 117, no. 201, pl. 56; Harrison 1988, p. 105. Mazi, the Zeus, Patras 203: Trianti 1985, pp. 36-37, no. 1:2, pls. 7-9. 35. Boy: Bookidis 1988, pp. 19-21, pl. 4; pp. 19-20, for discussion of the question of Corinthian style; on this question in the Archaic period, see also Bookidis 1998, esp. p. 248.

36. Karanastassis1986, pp. 264-267, 291. Delivorrias(1995, p. 216, note 51) rejects this association. 37. See above, pp. 24-25, and Sturgeon 1989. 38. Karanastassis 1986, pp. 268,270, and notes 31,256; LIMC II, p. 25, no. 157, s.v. Aphrodite(Delivorrias) (ca. 430 B.C.); Calza et al. 1977, pp. 44-45, no. 12 (ca. 420 B.C., Flavian copy); Amelung 1901, pls. 1, 2 (with side views). For a later dating and different identification, see Delivorrias 1993 and 1995 (ca. 400 B.C., as Aphrodite Ourania, with Eros on her hand). On different variations in different periods, see, e.g., Zanker 1974, pp. 44-45,117-119.

WEST CENTRAL

109

latter as Aphrodite), the "Venus rings" on the neck, and the coiffure all suggest that the most likely identification for the Corinth head is Aphrodite. The almost coy narrowing of the eyes and

the slightly parted, fleshy lips seem suitable for a sensuous figure like Aphrodite. The decorum

and restraint implied by the careful rolling up and covering of the hair and the lowering of the eyes impart a degree of modesty, even playfulness, that seems appropriate for a Classical-style Aphrodite, in contrast to the more openly sensual demeanor of Aphrodites in Hellenistic style. The type, or at least a second version of the same head, has yet to be recognized. In addition to its likeness to Aphrodite figures, the Corinth piece also displays notable similarities of style to the Hope Hygieia type, in particular, to the replica found on the Palatine and now in the Terme Museum.39 The broad, triangular forehead, narrow eyes with long upper lids, and short, undulating lips of the Corinth head are remarkably close in shape to the Hygieia's. Although the Corinth face is narrower, it presents a similarly full, oval shape. The portrait ofJulia Procula from Ostia, which has adopted the Palatine Hygieia type, is also similar, despite the fact that it is a portrait and of Late Trajanic date.40 Interpretation of the date and artist of the Hope Hygieia type has varied, but a date in the 370s B.C. seems plausible on stylisticgrounds.41 Association with Skopas seems doubtful, with Kephisodotos, intriguing but unsubstantiated. If the Hope Hygieia type were the product of a Peloponnesian school, this would explain some of its affinities with the Corinth head, but the Roman date of each makes it difficult to investigate questions of

regional origins. In summary,the similarityof proportions and facial shapes may signify a date for the prototype in the first quarter of the 4th century B.C. Some features of the Corinth piece correspond also to the "Hygieia"head from Tegea of ca. 370 B.C., especially when the two are observed in three-quarter right views.42Copies of the

Timothean Leda of ca. 370-360 B.C., especially those in Copenhagen and Ostia, also have eyes similarly shaped and hair covering the ears.43Rendering of the hair on the Leda is looser and more irregular, however, and the strands over the crown are thicker and more randomly positioned, signaling a later date than for the Theater piece. In addition, the Corinth Aphrodite's

forehead is not as triangularand the face is much longer than the shorter,more rounded face of the Leda, of some heads from the Temple of Asklepios at Epidauros from ca. 375-370 B.C., and of the Eirene of Kephisodotos of ca. 370-360 B.C. The different shape of the three examples from the second quarter of the 4th century B.C. is in fact a sign that they are later than the

Corinth piece, like the Leda.44 Similarity to the Hope Hygieia facial type raises the prospect that the Corinth head might

reflect a statue of Hygieia that stood at Corinth in the sanctuaryof Asklepios. Pausanias (2.4.5) mentions cult statues of Asklepios and Hygieia, but excavations in the Asklepieion have not uncovered recognizable fragments of either statue.45 Hygieia is depicted on some Corinthian

coin issues, but in these small representations, the goddess is shown with Hellenistic proportions and a "melon" hairstyle.46 Three statues of Hygieia from the 4th century achieved particular

fame in antiquity-one by Skopasfor Tegea (Paus.8.47.1),one by Bryaxisfor Megara(Paus.1.40.6), and a third by the sons of Praxiteles for Kos-but their appearance also eludes us.47 Hence, although Hygieia received a number of dedications during the 4th century B.C., there is no 39. Palatine head: EAA IV, p. 97, fig. 126, s.v. Igea (Paribeni); Helbig4, III, no. 2258, where referred to as an Early Imperial copy after a bronze prototype of the 370s B.C. and as a Peloponnesian work, but disconnected from Skopas and his group at Tegea; Ashmole 1927 for good illustrations; MusNazRom, I, 1, no. 143, perhaps Augustan. 40. OstiaV, no. 100. 41. See von Steuben in Helbig4, III, no. 2258. 42. Athens, NM 3602: Lippold 1950, p. 251, pl. 90:2; Karouzou 1968, p. 164. 43. Lippold 1950, p. 221, pl. 79:3; Rieche 1978, esp. pls. 14, 17. 44. Leda: Rieche 1978; Harrison 1982, fig. 20:e. Epidauros:

Crome 1951, pls. 5, 7, 10, 35, 36; Ridgway 1997, pp. 34-35; Yalouris 1992, nos. 10, 27, 37-39, pls. 12, 30, 31, 46, 47. Eirene: Vierneisel-Schl6rb 1979, pp. 255-273, no. 25; Fuchs 1983, fig. 399; LIMC III, p. 703, no. 8, s.v. Eirene (Simon); Ridgway 1997, p. 259. 45. CorinthXIV, pp. 143-145; few sculptures were found. 46. Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner [1885-1887] 1964, p. 25, no. 117, pl. F, a coin of the period of Lucius Verus. 47. Lippold 1950, pp. 252-253 (Skopas), 258 (Bryaxis); RE XI, p. 235 (sons of Praxiteles). On the first, see also Delivorrias and Linfert 1983, figs. 1, 2, torso identified as the Hygieia by Skopas, est. H. ca. 2.10 m; and Norman 1986.

110

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

evidence to support this identification for the Theater statue. With the evidence at hand, Aphrodite is the stronger candidate, especially given her importance at Corinth. If the Corinth head reflects a Classical statue, the type is unparalleled; it comes, on the basis of the date proposed above, from a time of few surviving dated examples. The possibility should be considered that the head is a Roman conflation of 5th- and 4th-century types, forming a new classicizing creation. Such adaptations may exist already in the 4th century, as W. Fuchs has pointed out for the head of the Artemis Colonna type (which bears some affinities with the Corinth head, though more softly rendered). Although this figure stems from an Attic original of ca. 340-330 B.C., its head reflects high Classical forms, possibly as part of a classicizing trend during the period of Lykourgos.48 The mixture of period styles-the combination of a late-5thcentury B.C. hairstyle and sakkos with an early-4th-century B.C. face, and the differences in style among profile, three-quarter, and front views-might result from the fact that the late 5th to early 4th century was a transitional period during which artists may have worked in a mixture of styles. Such a mixture is evidenced earlier, for instance, in the Parthenon south metopes and in Severe Style works. Alternatively, the prototype may come from the Argolid/Corinthia, an area for which statues of women from this period are not well known. The statue, then, could represent a Peloponnesian work of the early 4th century B.. with lingering 5th-century traits.49Finally, it is possible that the sculpture represents an idealized portrait.50 The features seem too generalized, however, to place it in that category. The actual period of carving can be established by analogy with dated works. Among Roman copies a general affinity is seen with the Kassel Apollo head in Florence, which Schmidt has dated ca. A.D. 130-150.51 The similarity can be observed in the long, narrow eyes with long upper lids and the relatively flat eyeballs, as well as in the long, regular cheeks and square chin-features that are also found on Hadrianic portraits. The Kassel Apollo head, however, displays a much harder surface finish. Similarly shaped eyelids, long upper lids, and comparable eyeball shapes are seen in works dated Early Hadrianic, such as figures from the attic of the Arch of Trajan at Beneventum and in a head from a funerary relief in Athens.52 The latter works are also more comparable in other facial shapes and in finish, so a date in the Hadrianic period can be suggested. 16

Head of "Ares"of Ludovisi type, P1. 31:a, b from statue of Hermes(?) S-668. Theater, tr. 34b, central stage building, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 76). Max. dim. 0.210 x 0.187, D. 0.078, p.L. from center crown 0.188, p.W. at eye 0.125 m. Twojoining fragments; head broken from center forehead through right eye, cheek, and diagonally at right. Missing chips from hair and ear; the outer surfaces of the locks worn. The hair retains a considerable amount of red paint (10R 5/8 and 2.5YR 5/8), but no traces of gilding.53 Bibliography: Corinth IX, p. 59, no. 83, "perhaps Greek," of Lysippan style; Lippold 1933, p. 17, and 1950, p. 289, note 11, identified as a replica of the Ares Ludovisi; Stewart 1977, pp. 116,173, note 16; Lattimore 1979, pp. 72-73, no. 9, pl. 6, fig. 13; Vierneisel-Schlorb 1979, 48. On the date, see Fuchs 1983, pp. 221-222, fig. 239; LIMC II, pp. 638-639, no. 163, s.v. Artemis (Kahil); and Bieber 1977, pp. 88-89, figs. 356, 357. 49. On lingering 5th-century styles, see Ridgway 1981a, pp. 225-241, especially the comments on p. 230 regarding different possible interpretations. 50. So Felletti Maj (1953, no. 6) has termed a similar head in Rome, Museo Nazionale 483, a possible ideal portrait of a famous woman, perhaps a poetess.

pp. 424, 427; Beck 1984, no. 216.7. Marble, white, fine to medium grained; possibly micaceous. A segment of the right side of the head from a statue somewhat over life-size. The head is characterized by thick, irregular locks and a cauliflower ear. Little of the face is preserved, but there remain a prominent swelling over the right eye, a slight depression in the central forehead, and the outer corner of the eye, above which the rounded upper lid extends beyond the flat lower. The fleshy portion of the ear has three swellings of different sizes, while the outer edge is set off by a deep groove, as if it were a separate section. The lobe is also separately articulated. Short, comma-shaped locks curl randomly. The hair waves forward from the missing back, curves down beside the cheek, and is directed up and toward proper 51. PalazzoVecchio: Schmidt 1966, pp. 22-25, pls. 25-27; LIMCII, p. 219, s.v. Apollon(Lambrinoudakis),on the type; LIMCIII,pp. 374-375, no. 41, s.v.Apollon/Apollo (Simon). 52. Beneventum: Wegner 1956, pl. l:a, b; Fittschen 1972. Athens, NM 3085: Datsouli-Stavridi1985, p. 55, pls. 59, 60; Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 67. 53. For other sculptures from the Theater on which pigment is preserved, see the Index, s.w. color;pigments.

WEST CENTRAL left over the right half of the forehead. Larger curls are given volume by arranging each strand of hair successively higher than the next. A short, curlier lock waves left over the central forehead. Most locks across the forehead are similar in plasticity, but some on the side are flatter, as if sweat had caused them to adhere to the scalp. Around the face, strands are moderately detailed with the edge of a flat chisel; in contrast, farther back from the face, curls are less detailed and somewhat less plas-

111

tic, the edges mostly rounded, not beveled. The hair shows no undercutting or drillwork, even behind the ear. The chisel work is not deep, so the overall effect is soft. Facial surfaces are carefully smoothed and rasp marks eliminated, although a certain unevenness of surface from chisel work remains over the right cheek. The head's contour is undulating and irregular. Early Imperial.

The most telling features of this head are its thick, tousled locks, swelling over the eye, and cauliflower ear, features that place the type in the 4th century B.C. and characterize it as an athletic personage. As Lippold first suggested, this head corresponds to the seated Ares in the Ludovisi Collection in Rome.54 Among replicas of the Ares Ludovisi type, the Corinth piece is closest to the heads in Munich and Vienna.55 Stewart has pointed out that the gap behind the outer corner of the eye, not a Lysippic feature, but a Skopaic one, shows up clearly on the head from the Theater in Corinth.56 This is borne out by consideration of heads in the Skopaic artistic milieu. The Corinth piece is too fragmentary to support an attribution, but the similarity with the Ares Ludovisi type suggests a prototype from ca. 330-320 B.C. Although there is no question that the head type reflects a famous original, the date of the prototype and its identity have been much discussed. The number of heads conforming to this type and their consistency support the interpretation that they derive from a famous prototype of the 4th century B.C. Lattimore favors an identification as Achilles and a date in the 340s or 330s B.C.; the statue has also been considered an eclectic work of the Late Hellenistic period.57 Lattimore's identification as Achilles hs much to recommend it, since the hero is frequently depicted seated, in paintings and in the sculpture that gives the type its name.58 The idea of Achilles sitting out of battle, as well as his popularity in the Roman period, might favor his presence in the Corinth Theater, but a seated statue seems more suitable for the cavea than for the columnar scaenae frons, where this piece was found. It is important to remember that the apparent usefulness of this head type allowed it to be associated with various body types, standing as well as seated, and that no evidence for the pose of this sculpture survives.59Given the type's adaptability and the lack of an attribute, the identification cannot be certain, and the traditional label of "Ares"is retained here for ease of reference. The Corinth fragment contains details that are not regular features of the Ares Ludovisi type, such as the fine locks of hair before the ear. The Hermes from Atalanti also sports wispy hairs in this area.60These locks were probably added to characterize the age of the subject, whose beard wasjust beginning to grow. The Eretreia and Atalanti youths are probably funerary statues, so the head type appears adaptable to funerary portraits that are shown in the guise of Hermes.61 In addition, despite fidelity to the prototype in the locks' arrangement, the Corinth version differs in its flatter, more linear rendering in comparison with the name piece of the type. This could be a function of the carving date, which is probably Early Imperial, a date supported by 54. Rome, Museo Nazionale 8602: Helbig4, III, no. 2345; MusNazRom, I, 5, no. 51; Stewart 1977, pp. 116-117, 173, note 16, where the Corinth head is listed as a copy of this type; Lattimore 1979; LIMCII, p. 481, no. 24, s.v. Ares (Bruneau) (= LIMC II, pp. 514-515, no. 23, s.v. Ares/Mars [Simon], attributed to Skopas the Elder [Bruneau]); Ridgway 1990a, pp. 84-

87. 55. Munich, Glyptothek 272: Lattimore 1979, no. 4, figs. 4, 5, pl. 3. Vienna, Antikensammlung 11028: Lattimore 1979, no. 5, figs. 6-8, pl. 4. 56. Stewart 1977, pp. 116, 173, note 16. 57. Lattimore 1979, esp. pp. 75-76; p. 71 for a summary of previous views. On the Late Hellenistic date, see Fink 1964. See also Raftopoulou 1980, pls. 175-184. 58. Witness, e.g., the number of Achilles sarcophagi: LIMC

I, pp. 142-144, nos. 618-631, s.v. Achilleus (Kossatz-Deissmann). See also Kemp-Lindemann 1975. For a seated statue displayed in a cavea, see the portrait of Sabina as Ceres and Venus, restored on its base, notably at the center of the upper cavea: Caputo and Traversari 1976, no. 68. 59. Note, for instance, the head attached to a body of Hermes Richelieu type in the statue from Atalanti, Athens, NM 240: Fink 1964, pl. 34; Lattimore 1979, no. 13, fig. 17, pl. 7. 60. See note 59. 61. Eretreia youth, Athens, NM 244: Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 2. Cf. also the youth from Aigion, Athens, NM 241: Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 16. Atalanti youth, Athens, NM 240: Maderna 1988, pp. 86-87, 110, pl. 27:1. On the later use of Classical Hermes types, see Wrede 1981, pp. 273-283, as Mercury; and Maderna 1988, pp. 81-116, as portraits.

112

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

comparison with the Torlonia head, which is possiblyJulio-Claudian, and with the bronze herm of the Doryphoros from the Villa of the Papyri at Herculaneum and a head in the Milles Collection in Stockholm, both of Augustan date.62The breadth of the locks and the way each is detailed with a minimal number of shallow chisel strokes correspond to the Corinth Doryphoros head (20), and may indicate that it formed part of the same programmatic group. Perhaps the most significant variation from the Ludovisi type lies in the treatment of the ear like the cauliflower ears of boxers, which here has a pronounced bulge accentuated by a continuous crease around the outer edge.63 Whether such ears formed part of the 4th-century B.C.statue or are a Roman addition cannot be ascertained.64 The ear suggests that the statue depicted an athlete, perhaps a specific individual; swollen ears have also been noted as features of divinities of agonistic character.65A portrait of a local figure known for his victories in boxing events would be possible, or a mythological figure such as Meleager.66 If it were a deity, Hermes would be the most appealing choice, as he is otherwise absent from the Theater assemblage and he is depicted as a standing figure on Roman coinage of Corinth.67 The selection of contemporary Greek originals as models does not seem to be a consideration in the formation of Roman Classical-type groups, a principle

that is well illustrated by this assemblage

17

Head of Athena Pl. 31:c, d S-3418. Museum basement marble pile, probably from Shear's Theater excavations. P.H. 0.101, p.W. 0.078, p.Th. 0.067 m. Single fragment, preserving lower section of hair hanging down nape, with a bit of neck adjoining at left; broken above base of helmet. Surface missing some chips. Marble, white, fine to medium grained; micaceous; Pentelic. A segment of the lower back of the head from a helmeted Athena on a scale somewhat over life-size. The long, wavy hair is unbound at back, twisted toward the center at the nape. The undecorated lower edge of the

from the Theater.68

helmet survives together with a doubled-over piece of fabric emerging from beneath it, as exemplified by the Frankfurt Athena type.69 Light rasping is preserved on the helmet and fabric. The hair and neck surfaces are smoothed, but not polished. The sharply chiseled groove that here marks the separation between skin and hair is unusual among sculptures associated with the Theater, but is paralleled by the groove separating the leg from the support in the striding Artemis(?) (18). The faceted and somewhat sketchy rendering of the hair is common among sculptures from the Theater. 2nd century A.c.

The helmet rim's position low on the nape suggests that it is Corinthian rather than Attic in type. Hence, the statue could reflect a Classical Athena type, such as the Giustiniani or Rospigliosi, in which a soft fabric emerges from beneath the helmet.70 Athena is an important deity in Corinth; her image appears on a number of Roman coins from Corinth and the sanctuary of Athena Chalinitis lay near the Theater (Paus. 2.4.1) .71The likely findspot of this piece and its size, material, and subject make an association with the statuary between the columns possible. 62. Torlonia: Lattimore 1979, no. 10, figs. 14,15, pl. 6, "Ares." Bronze herm, Naples, Museo Nazionale 4885: Kreikenbom 1990, no. III 42, pls. 172-175. Stockholm: Zanker 1974, p. 38, no. 35, figs. 1, 3, pls. 38, 39. Note especially the varied height of relief of the individual clumps of hair. 63. See, e.g., Schauenburg 1963; Ridgway 1982; Eckstein 1985. 64. Cf. the "Meleager" bust from Kalydon: Bol 1988, p. 37, pl. 27:b. 65. Inan 1975, pp. 24-25, regarding Herakles and Hermes. 66. Vitruvius (7.5.6) discusses the appropriateness of certain statuary types to certain buildings and the absurdity of their misuse. Fuchs (1987, p. 187) has argued that it is unlikely that nude male statues in theaters would have been understood simply as athletes, but rather would have been interpreted as particular mythological figures, or as one of a group of operanobilia, chosen to add to the grandeur of the facade. 67. Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner [1885-1887] 1964, pp. 2021, nos. 86-87, pl. E. Pausanias (1.3.4) mentions a bronze statue of a seated Hermes with a ram on the road to Lechaion. 68. So, for instance, in the theater at Lecce, an Amazon of Sciarra type is set up with an Athena Giustiniani, an Artemis

Gabii, and a Polykleitan Herakles type (Fuchs 1987, pp. 191192). On Meleager, see Hanfmann and Pedley 1964; Fuchs 1983, p. 111, fig. 103; and Ridgway 1990a, pp. 87-89. The Doryphoros head (20) and the head of Ares Ludovisi type are on about the same scale, but by different hands. Contrast the ears: the inner surface of the Doryphoros's ears also have fleshy, uneven surfaces, but the bulges are less pronounced, roughly finished, rather than cauliflowered; the outer rim projects more and is overlapped by locks. 69. See, e.g., Ridgway 1970, pp. 85-86, fig. 123; LIMCII, p. 1015, no. 623a, s.v. Athena (Demargne). 70. Cf. Waywell 1971. Athens, NM 3004: Karanastassis 1987, no. BVI 3, pl. 53:1-3. As Karanastassis points out (1987, 427, p. pp. 360-369), the Ince Athena type, with Corinthian helmet, also sees a wide use in the Imperial period; see Mangold 1993, p. 56, for a list of copies and variations. For the Giustiniani type, see Waywell 1971, p. 381, no. 3; and LIMCII, p. 1086, no. 154, s.v. Athena/Minerva (Canciani). For the Rospigliosi type, see LIMCII, p. 981, no. 257, s.v. Athena (Demargne). 71. On coins, see Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner [1885-1887] 1964, p. 21, nos. 91-93, pl. E; pp. 24-25, no. 116, pl. F

WEST CENTRAL

18 Booted legs of striding Artemis(?)

P1.31

18A Right leg, feet on plinth P1.31:e S-422/562/574/740. S-422,foot: Theater,tr.34a, central stage, 1902 (Corinth NB 13, p. 35). S-562, leg: Theater, tr. 34b, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 60). S-574, ankle: Theater, tr. 34b, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 75). S-740, r. foot: no recorded provenance, 1905. P.H. 0.632, p.H. r. leg 0.550; r. foot: p.L. 0.280, W. 0.112; plinth: H. 0.050, W. 0.360, D. 0.560 m. Four joining fragments; broken diagonally through right knee and support behind, and left ankle. Boot heavily weathered. Traces of red paint on sole of right boot. Bibliography:CorinthIX, p. 37, no. 32 (S-562 only). PI. 31:f 18B Booted left ankle S-3629. Shear's excavations, probablyfrom the Theater. P.H. 0.106, p.W. 0.068, p.Th. 0.097 m. Single fragment;broken diagonallyabove and below ankle, missing one side. Heavily weathered with some encrustation. 18A-B:Marble,white, fine to medium grained;with gray streaks. Two pieces of similar marble and scale. 18A is the lower right leg and left foot from a statue somewhat over lifesize, dressed in a short skirt,and moving to our left. The right, supporting leg wears a boot rising to below the calf muscle, with three flaps turned down at the top; the

113

surface of the flaps is irregular,as if to depict a skin, but the type of skin is no longer clear. Edges framing the boot's tongue are punctuated by bumps, now barelydetectable, perhaps loops for laces, and a seam runs down the center front. The tie ends hang forwardat the ankle. The position of the left foot-turned out, slightlybehind the right,and restingon the ball-indicates that the lower torso is moving to our left or three-quartersforward, depending on the orientation of the plinth; the toes are modeled through the boot and the soles are set off. A tree trunk supports the right leg. It is certain that the support is broken near its original top, since the inward-curvingloweredge of the skirtsurvivesat rearalong the break. The tree trunk is textured in front by horizontal strokes of a drove; a knot and a small projecting stump provide detail at the figure's right; and the rear surface is roughly cut back. The leg is separated from the support by a chiseled groove, less sharp than that present on the Amazon (67). The edge of the oval plinth is preserved on all sides; its top is dressed with a flat chisel along a broad section parallel to the right foot, elsewhere it is roughly dressed with a point. The sides are nearly vertical and may preserve parts of two cuttings, located at the breaksbehind the feet, for clamps that would have secured the plinth to a statue base. 18B preserves most of the outside of a left ankle wearing a boot with laces. The type of boot and weatheringcorrespond to those of 18A,so this piece probablybelongs to that statue. Early 2nd century

A.C.

The booted legs 18A and 18B indicate the presence of an over life-size statue. Tooling on the tree trunk contrasts sharply with the treatment on tree trunks at Corinth dated to the 1st century A.C., like the fine claw-chisel work on S-1065, "Gaius"Caesar,72and the flat-chisel tooling on the Tiberian to Claudian mantle statue from the Theater (2). The technique is closer to that from the 2nd century A.C., in particular to that of the Amazon's support (67), and less stylized than that of the Antonine mantle statue (68), so it may belong to the first half of the 2nd century A.C. The findspot in the 1902 and 1903 trenches over the west-central stage building suggests a location between the columns of the facade west of the porta regia. Boots to midcalf, as here, are often worn by Dionysos, but in sculpture they are frequently quite elaborate, as on the better-preserved piece Corinth S-3563. The latter has several ties down the front, the ends of which were attached on the sides, where their stubs now remain. A good example of such multiple ties and side attachments is on the Dionysos on the East Gigantomachy frieze from the Great Altar at Pergamon.73 Such elaborate boots are also worn by freestanding statues of the Hope Dionysos type, such as the one in St. Petersburg.74 The simplified boot form worn by the Copenhagen Dionysos of Hope type is closer to that preserved on 18.75 Tall, plain boots similar to those of 18 are also worn by Dionysos on slab II of the bema reliefs on the Theater of Dionysos in Athens.76 72. S-1065: CorinthIX, pp. 72-74, no. 135; de Grazia 1973, no. 11; Pollini 1987, pl. 2. 73. Berlin, Staatliche Museen: LIMCIII, p. 477, no. 657, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri); Kihler 1948, pl. 21; Morrow 1985, pp. 124,

138, 178, fig. 119. 74. Hope type: LIMCIII, pp. 436-437, no. 128, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri); Pochmarski 1974, pp. 69-72; BMMA 1991, pp. 1011, now in NewYork, dated late 1st century A.C. St. Petersburg, Hermitage A 104: Waldhauer 1931, pp. 28-30, no. 128, pl. 30; LIMC III, p. 437, no. 128c, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri).

75. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 2025: LIMC III, p. 437, no. 128b, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri). 76. Sturgeon 1977, p. 37, fig. 3. Cf. also the relief from the Theater of Dionysos in Athens, NM 1489, dated to the 4th century B.C. (Karouzou 1968, p. 132; LIMC III, pp. 494-495, no. 853, s.v. Dionysos [Veneri]). Although also discussed as Artemislike, a figure in Argos found in the vicinity of the theater is sometimes identified as Dionysos because of its dress (though lacking lower legs and boots); see Marcade and Raftopoulou 1963, pp. 89-97, figs. 39-41.

114

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

Artemis and Amazons are also shown wearing tall boots. An example from Corinth, the 2ndcentury A.C. Amazon (67), wears a higher, plainer style of boot that lacks the suggestion of a skin or flaps and whose laces are rendered as broad, flat bands. When Artemis wears boots, however, they are most often the short running boots.77 The likely context of this sculpture in the colonnade on the scaenae frons may make Dionysos a less viable choice than Artemis, for the Theater is probably built in his honor and an altar to him (50) exists in the orchestra. Moreover, a large Dionysos (26) appears in the opening of the porta regia, though the Thasian marble from which it is made suggests that it was added as part of a separate dedication, possibly after the main group of sculptures associated with the scaenae frons. The popularity of the running Artemis type is attested at Corinth in sculpture as well as on coins and lamps.78This figure therefore may depict Artemis, for she is not otherwise represented among the deities standing between the columns. She would be shown as huntress wearing a short costume, short running boots, and running to viewer's left with the weight on her right leg, as found in variants of the Artemis of Versailles and in the Artemis Rospigliosi type.79 EAST CENTRAL (19-22) Pls. 30:d, 32, 34:a 19 Head of Monteverde type, as an athlete S-425. Theater, tr. 34a, south, before stage, 1902 (Corinth NB 13, pp. 40-41; 56, p. 67). P.H.0.277, W.0.181, D. 0.207, H. crown to chin 0.230, H. forehead to chin 0.160,W.face at eye level 0.131;neck: W. 0.122, D. 0.110 m. Single fragment; head missing nose, ends of locks, right brow, lips, chin, ear, and top of hair. Hair weathered. Tracesof paint were noted on the eyeballsby Richardson (1903, p. 452). Bibliography: Richardson 1902, p. 22; 1903; 1904, fig. 1; Mahler 1904, fig. 1; Lechat 1905, p. 114;Amelung 1926, pp. 265-269, figs. 27-33; Carpenter 1928, pp. 7273, no. 8;Johnson in CorinthIX, pp. 7-9, no. 4; Poulsen 1940, p. 33, attributed to Lykios;Bieber 1943, p. 120; Lippold 1950, p. 179 with note 3; Paribeni 1953, pp. 2728 (s.v. no. 30), with list of replicas; Berger 1958, p. 18 with note 60; Helbig4, III, s.v. no. 2201, the Terme replica dated Neronian to Early Flavian (Zanker); Lauter 1966, note 136; Ridgway1970, p. 71; Zanker1974, p. 92, note 178, under no. 7, pl. 72:3; Sturgeon 1975, p. 289; Vierneisel-Schlorb1979, p. 97, note 43; Trillmich 1981, I, 1, under no. 49, the pp. 288-289, pl. 39; MusNazRom, Terme piece dated Claudian (Paribeni);Sturgeon 1989, pp. 117-119, fig. 6, pl. 44. Marble, white, medium to fine grained; with gray streaks.

Male head, turned toward the right, from a life-size statue. The head has a rounded cranium that is long from front to back, and narrow in frontal view in relation to its length. The facial contour tapers toward the narrow chin, and the cheeks recede quickly from the front plane. The straight forehead, of even height, is unlined. The eyebrows, shaped as even arcs, are marked by ridges, the outer end being slightly more prominent on the right. The eyes are large, opened wide, and shallowly set beneath the brow, the eyeballs relatively flat in the frontal plane. The right eye is somewhat larger, but appears more naturally sized in three-quarter left view. The upper lid, which extends beyond the lower, is sharply chiseled; the lower is unarticulated, forming a smooth transition to the cheeks. Narrow at the base, the nose was straightsided. The mouth is of medium width, the lips parted by a channel that is narrow and shallow in comparison to that of the Doryphoros head (20A). It lacks the tongue as seen on the hip herm of Herakles (22) and the youth from Temple E (S-1570).80 The upper lip is thinner than the lower, and has two upward points; the lower lip is longer and narrower, its lower edge curving out and down. The cheeks reveal graduated modeling at the base of the nose and outer corners of the mouth; the chin is square and firm. Thejaw is sharply set off from the neck, contrasting with softer transitions on the heads of Aphrodite (15) and the Doryphoros. Both ears are care-

77. On Artemis, cf. LIMCII, p. 642, no. 204, s.v. Artemis (Kahil) (Istanbul,ArchaeologicalMuseum 121); p. 643, no. 224 (Istanbul, Archaeological Museum 61, from Cyrene); p. 645, no. 251 (Athens, NM 3567); p. 727, no. 1359 (Herakleion, Archeological Museum 266); LIMCII,p. 802, no. 18, s.v.Artemis/ Diana (Simon) (Rome, Museo Nazionale 108518). On Amazons, see LIMCI,pp. 613-614, no. 421a, s.v.Amazones(Devambez), pediment from Epidauros;see also p. 177, note 47, be-

Sturgeon 1995,pp. 490-492; 1998b,pp. 6-7; and 2003, pp. 363364. For Artemis on coins, see Imhoof-Blumerand Gardiner [1885-1887] 1964, p. 18, nos. 66-68, pl. D; on lamps, Corinth IV,ii, Type XXVII,nos. 584-585, fig. 46, pl. 26. 79. See LIMCII, pp. 645-649, nos. 250-333, s.v. Artemis (Kahil), for Artemis running in short costume, esp. no. 261, once in the LansdowneCollection, her weight on the right leg; LIMCII, pp. 805-809, nos. 27-36, s.v. Artemis/Diana(Simon), esp. no. 35, Rospigliosi type. 80. CorinthI, ii, pp. 216-217, fig. 172.

low.

78. On other running Artemis sculptures at Corinth, see

EAST CENTRAL

fullydetailed;the hair abutsthem directlyand some locks curl up and over them. An even ridge marksthe helix, a detail also seen on the head of Ares Ludovisi type (16). Soft modeling indicates the neck's turn to the right, which is more evident in rear view. Short hair,arrangedin long, wavylocks, radiatesfrom the crown, directed down over the forehead and to the front of the ears, alternately curving in opposite directions. The hair is worked with greater volume about the

115

face than in back. Over the forehead, hair clusters are separated by drill channels, with the centers of curls marked by holes. Sharp chisel work and some finer drillworkrender individualstrandswith great clarity,the greater detail reserved for the left, the primaryviewing side. All surfaces are brought to a careful finish, providing a fine sheen on well-preservedareas of the neck. EarlyHadrianic.

This head of 5th-century type derives from a statue of a young man. It corresponds to the Monteverde type, named after a statue of a nude youth formerly in the collection of the sculptor Giulio Monteverde, now in the Museo Nazionale in Rome.81 The third and most complete repre-

sentative of the type is the well-preservedstatue in the Cleveland Museum of Art, and a badly worn head has been recognized in Spain.82In this type the head is turned three-quarterstoward proper right, the side of the weight leg. The weight shift onto the right leg is moderately reflected in the raised right hip, and balanced by the slight rise of the left shoulder. Both feet are flat on the plinth in the "Atticstance." The heads of Monteverde type are consistent in the arrangement of the hair, in which pointed ends of wavystrands, brushed forward, alternately curve toward and awayfrom the central axis of the forehead. The locks' irregulararrangement and their tendency to adhere in clumps, curling at the ends, are suggestive of recent movement. No example of the Monteverde type preserves an attribute, and the subject is unknown. The short hair, asymmetricaland unkempt for its period, would probably have suggested an athlete to an ancient viewer. It could depict a recent victor in one of the games, which is a possible subject even without a wreath, as the Agias at Delphi shows.83The Monteverde type occurs with far less frequency than the Doryphoros type, which claims over 100 replicas. Its youthful character may have led to its choice as the pair for that well-knownathletic type. The date of the prototype for the Monteverde type and the question of artistic association have frequently been discussed. That the type is not to be connected with the Polykleitanschool is clear from the skull's rounded shape in front and profile views, in contrast to the flatter cranium and squarer proportions of, for example, the Doryphoros.84There are also other differences from the Doryphoros type: the locks on the Monteverde type head are longer, not sickleshaped, and do not provide a symmetricalframe for the face. Ever since its discoveryin 1902, this piece has been compared to a head from Perinthos, now in Dresden, and related works, such as the Berlin Diskobolos head, the Cyrene athlete and its Side counterpart, the head in Ince/Blundell

Hall, and the Riccardi bust in Florence.85 Through

associationwith these worksthe Corinthhead has been affiliatedwith the artistsMyron,Pythagoras, and even Lykios, the son of Myron.86In addition, Amelung brought it into the circle of works associated with the Omphalos Apollo Master.87Although the Monteverde type resembles the Perinthos head and its group more than the circle around the Omphalos Apollo Master,it seems sufficientlyunparalleled by the Perinthos group to prevent association with it. In particular,the 81. Rome, Museo Nazionale 75219: EA 135-137; Poulsen 1940, pp. 28-33; Paribeni 1953, no. 30; Helbig4,III, no. 2201, Pentelic, original dated 440-430 B.c.; Zanker 1974, p. 92, Claudian; MusNazRom,I, 1, no. 49; La Regina 1998, p. 134 (Germini), Claudianto Neronian. 82. Cleveland: Howard 1924, pp. 170, 180, cover photographs, H. 1.74 m; Bieber 1943, pp. 119-120; Lippold 1950, p. 179;Berger 1958, p. 17, note 57; Zanker1974, pp. 92-93, Antonine. Spain, Merida,Archeologico Museo:Trillmich 1981, fig. 1, pls. 35, 36, a chance find from Badajoz, dated Trajanicto Early Hadrianic, with more simplified configuration of hair locks, P.H. to midneck 0.252 m.

83. Agias: Fuchs 1983, p. 105, fig. 101; Lippold 1950, p. 287, pl. 102:3; Dohrn 1968, pp. 34-35, figs. 1, 2, pls. 10-20. 84. Cf. Arias 1964, pls. 30-34, or the Corinth Doryphoros

(20). 85. Perinthos: Furtwangler 1893, fig. 70. Berlin Diskobolos: Furtwangler 1893, fig. 69. Cyrene athlete: Paribeni 1959, no. 445, pls. 192, 193. Side athlete: Inan 1975, no. 3, pl. 10:a. Ince/ Blundell head: Furtwangler 1893, fig. 71. Riccardi bust: Arias 1940, no. 40, pl. 10. 86. See bibliography under 19, especially Richardson 1903; Lechat 1905; and Poulsen 1940. 87. Amelung 1926.

116

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

skull is broader and the forehead is wider and higher at the sides, giving the temples greater prominence and providing room for larger browsand eyes. The mouth is also larger and heavier, suggesting greater affinity with works of the advanced Severe style (450s B.C.) than with those

after 450 B.C.,the period in which the Perinthos head is customarilyplaced.88

Changing interpretations of the carving date of this piece illuminate the evolution of our understanding of Roman idealized sculpture. In 1903 Richardson dated it to the 1st century B.C.

or earlier and in 1926 Amelung assigned it to the Augustan period, both on the grounds of its fine quality.Zankerin 1969 also termed it EarlyImperial,but in 1974 revised his opinion, assigning the piece to the Trajanicto Hadrianic period. Finally,in 1981 Trillmich presented it as an example of fully developed Hadrianic classicism.89 Evidence for an Early Hadrianic date is provided by comparison with posthumous portraits of

Trajan,as, for example, those in Copenhagen and Munich, on which the forehead locks show similar thickening and separation.90The head of a Trajanicgeneral in Houghton Hall presents similar characteristics.91 The long, flat eyes and narrowed lower face of the Late Trajanic female

figure in Athens (NM 2313) are somewhat similar,but the greater curve of the upper lids and fuller mouth of the Corinth head point to a later date.92 The eyes of a male portrait in Athens (NM 3086), dated to the Late Trajanic to Early Hadrianic period, are related in shape, although

more plasticallyrendered.93The Early Hadrianic bust from Phlius (Athens, NM 420) also has eyes with analogous shape, flatness, and sharp upper lid.94 The hair of the Corinth piece, which is brushed forward over the brow, is chiseled into sharply

separated strands that are thicker over the forehead and articulatedwith a small drill. The drill does not outline hair against the face, but delineates the largest clusters, marking the centers of

those that curl at the ends. This mode of rendering is paralleled by a fragmentaryhead of Trajan

in Corinth and by a Late Trajanic head in Munich.95 In addition, the coiffure of the Phlius bust of

EarlyHadrianic date seems to be a fuller version of the basic hair arrangement and technique illustrated here.96The technique in the hair is analogous to that of the helmeted head from the Theater (31); and the forms and execution of features have much in common with the "Perseus" head from Corinth of Hadrianic date-especially the eyes, mouth, and cheeks-though a later date is probably indicated by the thicker locks.97 The cold, abstract clarity heralds the development of Early Hadrianic classicism, contrasting, for example, with the warmth and emotional rendering of the Late Augustan to Tiberian Doryphoros head. As rendering of the hair on the

Monteverde head is very precise and includes engraved details on all sides, it is possible that the carverwas working from a new cast that had been taken directly from a bronze.98 The Monteverde head shows further similaritieswith the portrait of C[aius] ValeriusValens on a grave stele found outside Corinth.99 Since the Monteverde type probably represents an 88. On the Cyrene Perinthos type, see Ridgway1970, p. 71, and Inan 1975, pp. 25-27 (Cyrene, Side statues: Antonine). The dating of these worksis complicated by the fact that they are known only through copies. 89. Richardson1903;Amelung 1926,pp. 265-269; Zankerin Helbig4,III,no. 2201;Zanker1974,p. 92, note 178;Trillmich1981. 90. Copenhagen, Ny CarlsbergGlyptotek671:Poulsen 1974, no. 37, pl. 63. Munich, from Ostia: OstiaV,no. 87, pl. 50. 91. Trillmich1981, p. 288, note 79; Zanker1980, pl. 66:2-4. Trillmichhas also dated the head of the Corinth/Conservatori goddess in Rome to the EarlyHadrianicperiod;see also Raeder 1978, p. 258. 92. Datsouli-Stavridi 1985, p. 41, pl. 37;Rhomiopoulou 1997, p. 72, no. 71. Compare also the fragmentaryportraitof Trajan, Athens, NM 3298: Datsouli-Stavridi1985, pp. 39-40, pl. 35. Zanker(1974, p. 92, note 178) has comparedthe head of Trajan in Munich (OstiaV,pls. 50, 51). For the eyes, compare another portraitin Ostia, OstiaV,no. 105, pl. 61. 93. Datsouli-Stavridi1985, pp. 52-53, pl. 56. 94. Datsouli-Stavridi1985, p. 49, pl. 47 (autopsy);Rhomio-

poulou 1997, p. 73, no. 72. Cf. also the eyes of the EarlyHadrianic funerary head Athens, NM 3085: Datsouli-Stavridi1985, p. 55, pls. 59, 60; Rhomiopoulou 1997, p. 69, no. 67. 95. CorinthTrajan,S-72-22:Ridgway1981b, p. 435. Munich, Glyptothek 414: Daltrop 1958, pp. 29, 52, 67, 76, 85, fig. 23. Comparealso the portraitof Trajanin Rome, CapitolineMuseums, Magazzino 1892, dated before A.D. 112 (Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 44). 96. Athens, NM 420: Datsouli-Stavridi1985, p. 49, pl. 47; Rhomiopoulou 1997, p. 73, no. 72. 97. Sturgeon 1975, p. 289; LIMCVII, p. 335, no. 27a, s.v. Perseus (Roccos).

98. As in Lucian'sdescription (Iupp.trag.33) of a statue of Hermes in the Athenian Agora that was blackened from frequent pulling of casts. 99. Sasel Kos 1978, fig. 1, pl. 1, for which a late-lst-century A.C. date is proposed on the basis of artisticand epigraphical evidence and the movementsof the deceased'slegion. The style also has parallels in the first half of the 2nd century A.c.; see Sturgeon 1989, pp. 117-119.

EAST CENTRAL

117

idealized figure, it is possible that the relief portraitwas also influenced by Classical5th-century B.C. types, via the Roman classicizing workshops that produced them. Similaritiesbetween the

Valerius stele and the Theater head-in the arrangement and execution of the hair and the facial forms-are more particular than usual, but knowledge and understanding of the model

may have lessened to the degree that some characteristicsof the date of manufacture, especially the rendering of hair, eyes, and cheeks, have outweighed those of the model. When the head was found, it was associated with a partially preserved signature on marble

revetment found near it that reads ".. . .'AOrvatioc ?tOrLot." The revetment once formed part of

the building dedication, since the vi from dedicavitor a similar verb is cut in large letters above

the signature.100 If the statue was made locally,the amount of chiseled and drilled detail-which

is significantly greater than that of the female portrait 76 or the Theater reliefs, which may be relatively close in date-suggests a different workshop. The similarity to the grave relief of Valerius

mentioned above may result from a general tendency to plane back the lower half of the face.

The care with which this head has been worked on all sides stands in sharp contrast with the sketchy finish of the Doryphoros head, but is analogous to the other sculptures proposed to stand between the columns of the scaenae frons. 20

Doryphoros

Pls. 33-35

20A Head Pls. 30:d, 33, 34:b, d T-386/Sc. 51. Theater, east side of stage, 1.0 m above orchestra level, 1926. Head: p.H. 0.308, D. 0.257, H. crown to chin 0.275, H. forehead to chin 0.205, W. at temples 0.209, W. face at temples 0.147; neck: W. 0.144, D. 0.145 m. Two joining fragments; head broken diagonally near base of neck. Missing chips from right eyelids, right cheek, chin, and both ears. Parts of nose and chin restored. Shear (1926, p. 462) noted that the nose was broken off during excavation and reattached by the sculptor Demetriades of Athens. The conservator, Stella Bouzaki, records: "in 1987 I attempted to remove the nose, which appeared to be of plaster; it was actually plaster over decomposing marble. The marble was removed, consolidated with barium hydroxide, H2NCONH2, glycerine, and water, then reglued." Bibliography: Shear 1926, p. 462, fig. 15; Carpenter 1928, p. 77, no. 18; Lippold 1950, p.164, note 14; Reutersward 1960, p. 203; de Waele 1961, p. 192 with fig.; Lauter 1966, pp. 64, 69; Richter 1970, p. 190, figs. 691, 692; Lorenz 1972, p. 5; Schwingenstein 1977, p. 74; Ridgway 1981b, p. 434; 1984, pp. 7, 66, note 4, pl. 14; Fuchs 1987, p. 187; Tzachou-Alexandri 1989, no. 222; Kreikenbom 1990, pp. 87,175, no. III 45, pls. 180,181:a; Hallett 1995, p. 120, note 9; Hartswick 1995, p. 173, no. 29; Rolley 1999, p. 31, fig. 16; Bol 2001, p. 166, fig. 8. 20B Right arm P1. 35:a S-3611. Theater. "May 28 VII, 1." on the piece probably indicates cavea, section VII, 1.0 m above orchestra level, probably 1926 (see Plan I). P.L. 0.475, max. W. near elbow 0.120, Th. biceps 0.139, diams. wrist 0.062 and 0.077 m. Fourjoining fragments; arm broken through biceps. Missing chips from outer elbow and from joining surface at wrist; surface discolored. 100. Richardson 1902, p. 22. 1-251, found in 1902 (Corinth VIII, i, p. 54, no. 71), nowjoins 1-2294 (Theodotos: CorinthVIIIl, iii, p. 13, no. 41, pl. 5); see P1. 2:c.

20C Lower left leg P1. 35:b T-234a/Sc. 13. Theater, found with 20A, east side of stage, 1926. P.L. 0.390, W. 0.140, Th. 0.145 m. Single fragment; leg broken below knee and above ankle. Weathered and encrusted. 20D Lower right leg P1. 35:c T-234b/Sc. 13. Theater, east side of stage, 1926. P.L. 0.322, W. 0.135, Th. 0.135 m. Single fragment; leg broken below knee and above ankle. Bibliography: Shear 1926, p. 462, refers to the legs as found with the head. 20A-D: Marble, white with blue veins, fine to medium grained; identified as Parian by Shear, though it is more likely to be Pentelic, as it appears micaceous. These four fragments are grouped on the basis of their similar marble, somewhat over life-size scale, and technique. The head, which turned three-quarters to the right, is a squared rectangle in front and side views, while the broad face narrows somewhat toward the lowerjaw. The flat cranium is long from front to back, the contour tucking in sharply above the nape. The straight, sharp brows turn down at the ends, forming an angular juncture from front to side plane. The eyes are open wide, the eyeballs rounding outward. The lachrymal caruncle is lightly set off. The beveled upper lid projects, while an emphatic crease sets off the lower. Even curves describe the classically full cheeks, with light modeling at the base of the nose and at the corners of the deeply cut mouth. The parted lips turn down in a pout. The left side of the head is more detailed, establishing it as the primary viewing side. The left cheek is evenly smoothed, but the right remains rough, with uneven traces of chisel work evident through the rasping. The left ear is also more detailed than the right and is distin-

118

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

guished by a fold on the inside of the upper edge, whereas the right has the more characteristic cauliflowered shape, swollen with two breaks, like the typical pankratiast's ear.101The backs of the ears are not finished, and curls overlap their edges. Two short drill channels are cut behind the right ear. The neck's turn to the right is indicated by the powerful sternomastoid. The hair arrangement consists of pincer locks over the forehead and short, sickle-shaped curls throughout. On the left, strands are individually detailed and set into relatively flat clumps, curling at the ends near the ear. The hair is sketchier on the right and only roughly blocked out in back, as if the back would not be seen. The hair is sketchily finished throughout, a rendering that corresponds to the unsmoothed skin of the face, right arm, and lower legs. A great deal of red paint remains, especially at left. The same pigment, a clear red (10R 4/8), outlines the eyes, nostrils, and the inside of the mouth. The lashes and irises also appear to have been painted, and the lips were probably red. Traces of a yellowish-brown color (7.5YR 5/6) can be seen over parts of the forehead, brow, eyelids, cheeks, and neck. The right arm (20B) was held at the side, bent at the elbow. Modeling of the biceps is strong. Irregular modeling on the top of the forearm and the inside of the arm indicates that it was carved close to the torso. The hand was attached separately by a dowel (hole: L. 0.044, diam. 0.015 m), the joining surface scored with a point. A small hole (L. 0.012, diam. 0.002 m) and a flattened

area at the back of the wrist indicate an area of attachment, as to the upper thigh. On the side and back of the arm, rasping remains from a tool with a fine bit applied in short strokes crossing the limb. Rasping is eliminated from the inside of the arm, but the surface was left bumpy, giving it an unfinished appearance similar to that of the head. The rasp and its application to the limb are similar to that used on the legs, 20C and 20D. One particular feature is the attachment hole at the back of the wrist. The flattened area around the hole indicates that the wrist was designed to rest against something, most likely the thigh, but it has broken from it. Hence, the pin is not from a secondary repair, and the wrist was secured by the pin to the thigh in order to preclude breakage at this vulnerable point.102 In both lower legs the calf muscle is strongly modeled. The lower end of this muscle is more strongly set off on the right leg (20D), indicating that it is the weightbearing leg. Rasping remains over the front, left, and back of 20C; only the right side is smoothed, so this was the free leg, turned slightly to one side. On the front of 20D, rasp marks have been eliminated, but the uneven effect of chiseling still remains; short horizontal and diagonal rasping remains on sides and back. Although 20C has been associated with the left foot 14D, it cannot belong to the same statue because the upper break of 14D is wider than the lower break of 20C, and the break of 14D occurs above the ankle where the leg is thickening. Late Augustan to Tiberian.

Four pieces are associated here as parts of a replica of the Polykleitan Doryphoros, an ideal

type created ca. 450 B.C. The discussion will focus on the best-preservedpiece, the head. The impression of this version of the Doryphoros's head (20A) is of Late Hellenistic pathos. The head is a fairly accurate reflection, if sketchily rendered and somewhat unfinished, of the Canon of Polykleitos. It bears the pincer arrangement of locks over the forehead, a flat-topped skull, and hair abutting the ears, which are characteristic of this artist's works.103

Variousproblems beset attempts to date ideal sculpture on the basis of style, and estimates of the date of the Corinth head and some of its comparisons varyby several decades. For the purpose of our investigationof the Corinth Theater assemblage,it is important to note that dates for the comparisons fall within the first half of the 1st century A.C. rather than in the 2nd century.In his 1966 study,Lauter placed our head in the Augustan period, a date he supported by comparison with other ideal sculptures,104for example, the head of a Polykleitan Amazon in Naples, which he dates Late Augustan, especially because of the shape of the face and mouth.105The 101. Bol (2001) has drawn attention to the different treatment of the ears in the Doryphoros type. 102. Notably,the rightarmsof"Gaius"(S-1065)and "Lucius" (S-1080) Caesarat Corinth,which are from classicizingstatues on about the same scale and of similarbody types,do not show provision for attachment in this area. The back of S-1080 is bumpy and has two dowel holes, each ca. 0.01 m in diameterone in the elbow, the second in the middle of the upper armbut neither has a flattened area around it. 103. On the Doryphoros type, see Arias 1964, pp. 21-25, pls. 30-48; Lorenz 1972, pp. 4-17, 68-79, pls. 1-3, 26-29; Richter 1970, pp. 189-191; Steuben 1973, p. 28; Zanker 1974, pp. 7-8; Ridgway1981a, pp. 202-204; and LIMCI,p. 196, no. 908, s.v. Achilleus(Kossatz-Deissmann).See also Arias 1964, pl. 25, for the Conservatorireplica of the Westmacottathlete, and pls.

1-3, for other heads of Polykleitanstyle, in Berlin (Staatliche Museen 1833), Copenhagen (Ny CarlsbergGlyptotek114), and New York (MMA07.286.116). 104. Lauter 1966, pp. 64, 69; he also assigns it to the same workshop as the Augustus (S-1116) from the Julian Basilicaat Corinth, which, however,lacks the emotional rendering here. S-1116:CorinthIX, pp. 71-72, no. 134; de Grazia1973, no. 10, Claudian;Goette 1990, no. B a 34, LateAugustanto EarlyTiberian; Rose 1997a, pp. 138-139, Caligulan.The portraitof a Roman (28), formerlyidentified as Galba, comes from the same general period. 105. Naples, Museo Nazionale 150.401, from the sea near Baiae:Lauter1966, p. 116, pl. 7; Arndt 1930, p. 4; Bol 1998, pp. 196-197, no. 11.17,pls. 74-76:a.

EAST CENTRAL

119

eyelids of the Amazon, however, are more sharply set off from the cheeks than are those of the Corinth head, although the latter has a sharp separation between the area beneath the eyes and the cheeks below, possibly reflecting the sharper angle of a bronze model. R. Bol has assigned the Amazon a Late Augustan to Tiberian date. The head of a Polykleitan Hermes in Oslo, which Lauter also interprets as Late Augustan, possesses a similar degree of plasticity as well as the linear sharpness in the execution of details.106A few differences, however, can be noted: on the Oslo head the upper part of the cranium is not quite as broad, the locks are more finely chiseled, and the brows have more of an upward curve. In addition, the lower lids are more strongly set off from the cheeks with additional engraved lines defining the edge, although it must be admitted that the comparison is not quite just because of the lesser degree of finish on the Corinth head. A different reading of the Oslo sculpture has led Kreikenbom to place it in Caligulan to Claudian times. 07 Comparison with the plainer Doryphoros in Naples from the palaestra in Pompeii underscores the strength and emotional rendering of the Corinth version. Kreikenbom places the Naples palaestra figure in Late Tiberian to Early Claudian times, and considers the Corinth head from the Augustan to Tiberian era, favoring the Tiberian period because the hair has less volume than works considered Augustan and because it is similar to portraits of Tiberius.108 An examination of imperial portraits supports Kreikenbom's chronology. Lauter noted similarities between the Corinth head and the Capitoline portrait of Augustus of the Octavian type in the division of hair into clumps and in the sharpness of the brow.109In addition, a similar sharp separation of the slack skin below the eyes is found on heads of Augustus of the so-called Actium type.10 This feature is also seen on the bronze Doryphoros herm signed by Apollonios of Athens and dated to the Augustan period."' The portrait of Germanicus in Munich also bears this trait, perhaps betraying the influence of Polykleitan works onJulio-Claudian portraits."2 The hair of the Munich piece, however, is much thicker and so appears to be later. A portrait of Tiberius of his first portrait type, from the Late Augustan period, presents a similar rendering."13 The flat treatment of the Corinth locks is comparable to portraits dated to the Late Augustan period, and the curled ends of the sickle-shaped locks exemplify a classicizing detail favored at that time.14 The curled ends can be contrasted with the locks ending in curved points on a bronze statuette from Sikyon, produced in the second half of the 5th century B.C., probably under Polykleitan influence.115 Since the curls of the Theater head are especially evident from the primary viewing angle, as is the somewhat narrowed lower jaw, they contribute a certain decorative aspect to the head and reduce the strength of the original 5th-century image. The curled ends may, in fact, derive from transmission through a linear format, such as sketches, of the turned-out ends of these locks on earlier versions of this head type, as illustrated by the bronze herm from Herculaneum in Naples.116In addition, from front and three-quarter right views, it is apparent that the Corinth head is shortened and that the skull is less flat on top and less square in format than are Augustan examples of this type. Since the type is well known, it is 106. Oslo, National Gallery 1265: Lauter 1966, pp. 64, 6769, pls. 3, 10:a. 107. Kreikenbom 1990, pp. 45-47, 158, no. II 5, pls. 78-79; Zanker (1972, p. 389) also considers the Oslo piece Tiberian to Early Claudian. 108. Naples, Museo Nazionale 6011: Kreikenbom 1990, p. 163, no. III 2. Corinth: Zanker 1974, p. 8, note 36, pls. 5:1, 7:3; Kreikenbom 1990, pp. 87, 175. 109. Lauter 1966, p. 67. See also Capitoline Museums, Stanza degli Imperatori 2, inv. 413: Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 1, dated Augustan. 110. Cf. Zanker 1973, pp. 14-15, 17, no. 2, pl. 6:a, Florence, Uffizi 1914.76, dated Early Augustan; pp. 17-18, no. 4, pl. 9:a, Venice, Museo Archeologico 200, Late Augustan; and p. 18, no. 5, pls. 9:b, 11, Tripoli, Archaeological Museum 477, Augustan. 111. Naples, Museo Nazionale 854: Arias 1964, pls. 7, 8; Lau-

ter 1966, p. 48; Pandermalis 1971, p. 188; Zanker 1973, p. 45, pl. 33:b; Kreikenbom 1990, p. 174, no. III 42, High Augustan. 112. Munich, Residenz (no inv. no.): Kiss 1975, p. 114, fig. 392; p. 128, dated ca. A.D. 8. 113. Alexandria, Greek and Roman Museum 22237: Bonacasa 1962, figs. 1-3. 114. Cf. the curled tips on the marble head of Doryphoros type in Naples, Museo Nazionale 6412: Kreikenbom 1990, p. 174, no. III 43, pls. 176, 177; see Zanker's discussion of the Doryphoros type (1974, pp. 7-9). 115. Tzachou-Alexandri 1989, no. 69 (Athens, NM X7474). For another head at Corinth with curls that are possibly classicistic, see S-2824 from the Great Bath on the Lechaion Road (Corinth XVII, pp. 76-78, no. 108 [no date or identification]). 116. Naples, Museo Nazionale 6011: Kreikenbom 1990, no. III 2. 163, p.

120

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

clear, in this instance, that our sculpture is not only a copy, but also a fairly faithful one, albeit with modifications and classicizing additions. The portraits cited provide a starting point for interpreting certain features. It cannot be determined how long this manner of reproducing the Doryphoros type continued but, on present evidence, the best estimate for the date of the Corinth head is Late Augustan to Tiberian. Statues of the Doryphoros type have been found in theaters only at Carthage and Corinth, but statues of Classical athletic types commonly appear in theaters, where they may have occurred as thematic pairs.117For example, statues of the Polykleitan Diadoumenos and Doryphoros occur in the Carthage theater; the Herakles of Polykleitos and the Herakles of Lysippos, at Lupiae; and an eclectic statue in a Polykleitan manner, at Tergeste.l'8 The Polykleitan Diskophoros appears in the Aphrodisias theater, and a version of the Polykleitan Diadoumenos was found in the theater at Ephesos."19At Aphrodisias, statues of two boxers were set up, one at each end of the stage, and at Leptis Magna, statues of the Dioskouroi, a natural pairing, were set up on the proscenium.120 In the Hadrianic assemblage of the Corinth Theater, the Doryphoros was reused, and its original use is unclear. As indicated by its findspot, it may have been placed in an intercolumniation of the scaenae frons, probably on the east, where it would have faced the central axis of the building. It would have been an easily recognizable reference to Classical Greek culture. Horned figure, Pan(?) P1. 35:d S-3600. Theater, cavea, section I, opposite east hospitalium, 1928. "Corinth NB 320, p. 476" is written on the 21

piece. P.L. 0.102, W. 0.031-0.044 m. Single fragment; broken at both ends. Surface worn, weathered yellow. Marble, white, fine to medium grained.

Most of an animal horn, marked by seven curving ridges that are evenly spaced. One side is clearly distinguished as primary by its better finish. The horn as preserved has a single, gradual curve. Rendering of the ridges indicates that this is a horn and not a strut from a statue. Roman(?).

This horn may derive from a statue of a horned figure such as Pan, whose popularity at Corinth can be inferred from the discovery of two figures and one head. Three additional sculptures can be postulated from the remains of their horns, and various other fragments may represent further pieces.121Precedent for Pan in theaters is provided by architectural supports, for example, two high-relief figures attached to the paraskenia of the 3rd-century B.C. theater at Segesta. He appears later, in the Antonine period, in two over life-size support figures from the Theater of Pompey in Rome, acting as servants of Dionysos. Their horns rise vertically, adhering to the baskets carried on their heads.122 The horns of marble goats typically have a double curve and lengthwise striations, like the goat accompanying a satyr from the Athenian Agora that has a twisted horn with angled surfaces; our horn shows much more detailed treatment.123The horns of a small goat from the Villa of the Papyri have crosswise striations, so a goat might be possible here, but such detailed treatment for an animal seems unlikely in Roman Greece.124 Since our horn is carefully finished except in 117. Carthage: Fuchs 1987, p. 187, pl. 78:1. Palaestrae, gymnasia, and villas were more common locations for the Doryphoros type. 118. Fuchs 1987, p. 187, pl. 78:2, 3, Diadoumenos from the Carthage theater; pp. 52, 53, pls. 14:4-6, 15:1-3, Lupiae (modern Lecce); pp. 112-113, pl. 52, Tergeste (modern Trieste). 119. Aphrodisias: Erim and Smith 1991, pp. 72, 74, fig. 7. Ephesos: EphesosX, 1, p. 185, pl. 118:b. 120. Aphrodisias: Erim and Smith 1991, pp. 84-86, nos. 19,20. Leptis Magna: Caputo and Traversari 1976, pp. 27-30, nos. 7, 8. 121. S-2385, seated Pan used as a fountain figure from South Stoa West, with no horns (Morgan 1938, p. 364, fig. 2); S-2393, seated Pan from western Forum; S-2815, head from the Great Bath on the Lechaion Road, top of head not preserved (Corinth XVII, no. 106, pl. 29); S-2596, horn from South Stoa; S-2778,

horn from area west of Temple E; S-69-23,horn; S-69-25,hairy thighs from a Pan. The last four are unpublished, as are some fragmentarylegs and cloven hooves. 122. Segesta:Bulle 1928, p. 118, pls. 23, 24, 28:c, d; Herbig 1949, pp. 30-31; Bieber 1961a, fig. 603; Schmidt 1982, p. 126. Theater of Pompey, Rome, Capitoline Museums, Cortile 757, 758 (H. 2.8 m): StuartJones 1912-1926, I, nos. 5, 23, pl. 2; Bieber 1961a, fig. 604:a, b; Helbig4,II, no. 1192, 2nd century A.C.; Schmidt 1982, p. 126, pl. 29, late 2nd century A.C.;Fuchs 1987, pp. 5, 129-130, no. A I 1.2. On the god, see Borgeaud 1988; Marquardt 1995, pp. 105-114, pls. 16:1, 2; LIMCVIII, pp. 923-941, s.v. Pan (Boardman). 123. Agora S-62: Shear 1933, pp. 536-541, figs. 20, 21. 124. Naples, Museo Nazionale 27709: Marquardt 1995, pp. 207-208, pl. 21:1.

EAST CENTRAL

121

back, it probably derives from a statue in the round, rather than from a pier figure, and from one approximately life-size or a bit under.125Pan in the group of Pan and Aphrodite from Delos, for instance, sports a horn with similar striations, curve, and separation from the head.126The Corinth Theater figure could have formed part of a group or stood as a single figure, in either case a logical associate for Dionysos and his theater, recalling the grotto sanctuary of Pan associated with the Segesta theater. An attribute, such as a goat, fruit basket, lagobolos,syrinx,double flute, or tympanon, may have strengthened the association with Dionysos's thiasos.127Alternatively, this Pan could have carried the infant Dionysos, as a statue from Ephesos.128The horn could also be sported by a statue of Paniska, a goat, or even by a portrait statue.129Pan seems more likely in light of the size and quality of this piece, as well as Pan's appearance in other theaters. Herakles hip herm Pls. 36, 37 T-387/Sc. 52. Theater, one segment found on the east side of the stage, 2.0 m above orchestra level, another on the orchestra floor, 1926. P.H. 0.610, W. torso near bottom 0.316, D. waist 0.264, rest. W. shoulders ca. 0.42; head: H. 0.232, W. 0.159, D. 0.177, est. H. face 0.181, W. at temples 0.117 m. Ninejoining fragments, head and torso; broken from left elbow to below waist at right. Missing front of forehead, outer surfaces of nose and eyes, edges of ears and beard, outer surface of right hand, left shoulder, back of right shoulder, right side, and chips from lion's head; shoulders heavily weathered. Restoration in mantle and on upper left. Remains of yellow-brown pigment in hair (7.5YR 6/6); light brown residue on garment (5YR 6/4). Bibliography: Unpublished, but referred to as a "philosopher" by Shear (1926, p. 456); LIMC IV, p. 783, under no. 1149 from Tegea, area of the theater, s.v. Herakles (Palagia); Sturgeon 1989, pp. 119-121, fig. 7, pl. 44; Friedland 1997, p. 49, note 29. Marble, white, fine grained; possibly micaceous; probably Pentelic. Bearded head and upper half of the torso of a draped Herakles from a hip herm, approximately life-size, wearing himation, with lion skin over the left shoulder. The left hand hangs down; the right rests at the neck, securing from within the himation, which is wrapped closely about him, and creating a triangular pattern under the garment. The lion skin's mane and head, on the back of the left shoulder, are only slightly visible from the front. 22

Because of the location of the break, it is unclear whether the lion skin merged with the end of the cloak or was represented separately, but it emerges from beneath the mantle folds at the shoulder. Presumably the rest of the lion's mane and face would have comprised the missing area at the left shoulder. There is no indication of a club. The head and neck are thick. Modeling of the face is soft, but the characterization as Herakles specific. Graduated modeling highlights the high cheekbones. A slight sag in the cheeks indicates age. Emphasis on the zygomatic bones contrasts with more generalized work in the hair. The center of the left eye is not pierced; the inner corners are set off by shallow drill holes. The mouth is short and fleshy, the lips parted to reveal a narrow, recessed strip that is smoothly finished. The ears are cauliflowered, but not very detailed. The short, curly hair is brushed down over the forehead and adheres closely to the scalp. The hair is worked primarily with a flat chisel; there is no sign of a running drill. Rasping is smoothed from the skin, except adjacent to the mantle, but light rasping remains on the garment. Near the lower break an increasing four-sidedness is detectable, marking it as a hip herm. Above this level the piece is fully three-dimensional, a feature emphasized by the diagonal projection of the right arm through the mantle. The careful finish of garment and lion skin in back may indicate that the figure was set up so that its left side would be visible. Hadrianic (?).

In this statue Herakles is characterized as an older, athletic man by means of a heavy beard, cauliflower ears, and thick neck. The Nemean lion skin identifies the subject, and the left hand may have held an additional attribute. 125. For scale, contrast the head of Pan at Isthmia (Isthmia IV, no. 45), which is roughly half life-size, as were many Pan sculptures in this format; on others of this and related types, see Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1988b, pls. 79,80; and Marquardt 1995, pls. 5:1 (Cyrene, Museum 14.256), 14:2 (Cyrene, Museum 14.409). 126. Athens, NM 3335: Bieber 1961b, p. 147, fig. 629; Karouzou 1968, p. 186; Marquardt 1995, pl. 23:3, 4. 127. Compare depictions of Pan in the thiasos (LIMCVIII, pp. 933-935, s.v. Pan [Boardman]); on Dionysiac sarcophagi (Matz 1968-1975, I, pp. 61-65 [figure type TH 103-113]). Associated with both Pan and Dionysos are rearing goats flanking a vase, preserved in two reliefs at Corinth: S-3391, two goats and kantharos; and a more complete version, S-3746 (both unpublished).

128. EphesosX, i, no. 58. 129. Cf. the marble statuette, although much restored (including the horns), of a female Pan in Rome, Villa Albani, BrBr, no. 391: Herbig 1949, p. 37, note 93; p. 59, note 164, pl. 36:1; Helbig4, IV, no. 3281; Bieber 1961b, p. 148, fig. 631; Marquardt 1995, pl. 17:3. For goats in relief, painting, and mosaics, see Toynbee 1973, pp. 164-166, pls. 79-84. Goats are represented with Pan, with Paris as goatherd, or pulling the carriage of Dionysos; they seem less common as independent figures on a large scale, but they may have existed in this format, as the bronze ram in Palermo would suggest; see Richter 1930, pp. 25-27, figs. 120-135, 143, for Palermo ram. On portraits wearing horned attachments, see, e.g., the discussion in Smith 1988a,

pp. 42-43.

122

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

Among draped hip herms, a well-known format for ancient statuary, Herakles is well represented.130 Of these, the best known are a group of six in Rome, which form part of the Ludovisi Collection now in the Museo Nazionale Romano, dated to the 2nd to 1st century B.C.131Representing a Diskobolos, Theseus, Herakles, Dionysos, Athena, and possibly Hermes, the Terme hip herms are thought to have been set up in a gymnasium or palaestra, some possibly belonging to a bath (the first three), others to a library (the second three). The similarity of marble (Pentelic) and scale suggest that they were made as a group for a single location. They reflect statuary types from the 5th to 3rd centuries B.C.and,judging from the complete version of the Diskobolos type from Side, the prototype of this figure was a full-length statue.132The same argument, however, cannot be made for all the Terme hip herms; there is no comparable full-length statue for the Herakles. The Herakles hip-herm type achieves popularity first in the Hellenistic period, especially the 2nd century B.C., as examples from Delos, Kos, Pergamon, and Rhodes attest.133The type is also represented on a grave relief from Smyrna, dated to the second half of the 2nd century B.C.134 Some hip herms of Herakles are carved fully in the round, while in others, intended as support figures in architecture and, on a smaller scale, in furniture, the figure projects from a pier.135Hip herms depict Herakles in the nude or wearing a lion skin, mantle, or both. They vary in the attributes carried, of which the club, patera, and cornucopia are most common.136 The type has been considered at home primarily in the Greek East, but it is also popular in the islands, and examples are known from the Greek mainland as well.137 Literary sources associate Herakles herms with the gymnasium and palaestra, but they are also found in theaters, as at Sparta, Amiternum, and Leptis Magna, where they are used both architecturally and in the round.138At Sparta, seven Herakles hip herms are preserved on piers dated to the late 2nd century A.C. These probably decorated an upper story of the scaenae frons.139Hip herms decorating the ends of sarcophagi at Delphi and Aquileia may be intended to recall those placed at the ends of stages in some Roman theaters.140Herakles body herms are also used as 130. LIMCIV, pp. 781-784, nos. 1104-1172, s.v. Herakles (Palagia);Lullies 1931, esp. pp. 72-73, 76-78; Roscher,I, col. 2170; Lippold 1923, pp. 158, 161-162, 263, note 8, 264, note 44. 131. MusNazRom, I, 5, nos. 66, 68, 70, 72, 74, 76; max. p.H. 1.96 m. Cf. also the herm of Dionysos in the VaticanMuseums: Bieber 1917, p. 44, fig. 17; Amelung VatKat,I, p. 6, pl. I. The description in Pausanias1.8.4 has sometimes been associated with the herms in the Museo Nazionale in Rome. 132. Inan 1975, no. 1. 133. Delos, ArchaeologicalMuseumA 1813,A 3795,A 4010/ 4011, A 4258, A 6018: Marcade1969, pp. 454-456, pl. 20; LIMC IV, p. 782, nos. 1125, 1127-1129, s.v. Herakles(Palagia). Kos: Laurenzi 1955-1956, nos. 10, 175; LIMCIV,p. 782, nos. 1131, 1132, s.v. Herakles(Palagia). Pergamon: AvPVII, ii, no. 260. Rhodes: Gualandi 1976, nos. 177-180. 134. Pfuhl-MobiusI, no. 161, pl. 35; LIMCIV, p. 782, no. 1116, s.v.Herakles(Palagia). 135. In the round, cf. those in the Louvre: Clarac 18411853, III, nos. 2016 A, B, C, pl. 347; in Naples: Clarac 18411853, V, no. 1990, pl. 796; Ruesch 1908, no. 259; LIMCIV,p. 783, no. 1168, s.v. Herakles(Palagia); in the Torlonia Collection:Clarac1841-1853,V,no. 1992,pl. 796;in Rome, Capitoline Museums712: StuartJones 1912-1926, I, p. 321, no. 15, pl. 80; Helbig4, II, no. 1409; LIMCIV, p. 783, no. 1143, s.v. Herakles (Palagia);Reinach 1897-1930, IV,p. 331, no. 1; and in Patras: Papachadzis1980, p. 99, fig. 51; LIMCIV,p. 782, no. 1140, s.v. Herakles(Palagia);ArchEph1981, pl. 9:b;Vorster1989, pl. 46. Againstpiers, cf. those from Sparta:Wace 1905-1906, fig. 2 on p. 412; on their association with the theater, see LIMCIV, pp. 781-782, nos. 1109-1111, s.v. Herakles(Palagia); Palagia

1989, pls. 45-50. The Herakles hip herms from Samos were apparentlyset up in the Heraion, but their significance there is unclear; see Hiesel 1967, pp. 50-53, nos. 42-45, pls. 7, 8. On supportfiguresgenerally,see Schmidt 1982 and Sturgeon 1984. 136. Note the Herakles hip herm in Rome, Museo Nazionale 8611: LIMCIV, p. 783, no. 1165, s.v. Herakles(Palagia); Paribeni 1953, no. 35; Helbig4, III, no. 2335; Becatti 1968; MusNazRom, I, 5, no. 66.

137. For the islands, see note 133 above. In the Greek East they are frequently depicted on funerary reliefs: cf. PfuhlMobius, I, nos. 138, 141, 161, 256, 646, and 730. On the mainland, see Demakopoulouand Konsola1981, p. 30, no. 49; LIMC IV,p. 782, no. 1130, s.v. Herakles(Palagia);AgoraXI, nos. 228, 229; LIMCIV, p. 782, nos. 1137, 1139, s.v. Herakles(Palagia). On a coin of Megalopolis, see Papachadzis 1980, p. 292, fig. 279, lowerleft; LIMCIV,p. 782, no. 1124, s.v.Herakles(Palagia). Becatti (1968, p. 2, fig. 10) illustrates an Athenian coin with Herakles hip herm, Roman Imperial. 138. Cicero (Att.6.3.1) ordered Herakleshermsfor the gymnasiumin his Tuscanvilla.On Cicero'sletters, see Marvin1988. Sparta:see note 135 above.Amiternum, againsta pier: Biolchi 1938, fig. 1, pls. 1, 2; Guerrini 1961, p. 63, no. 17; Fuchs 1987, no. A I, 1, pl. 19:1, 2; LIMCIV, p. 781, no. 1108, s.v. Herakles (Palagia). Leptis Magna:Caputo and Traversari1976, no. 54, pl. 49, of standardherm shape. On herms in theaters,see Fuchs 1987, pp. 146-147. 139. Palagia 1989. 140. Delphi, on the rearface: FdDIV,vi, no. 30, figs. 99, 102; LIMCIV, p. 782, no. 1118, s.v. Herakles(Palagia). Aquileia: Giuliano and Palma 1978, p. 15, pl. VI, dated A.D. 165; LIMC IV, p. 782, no. 1117, s.v. Herakles(Palagia). Pan and Priapus

EAST CENTRAL

123

statuarysupports; witness the boxer from Sorrento, now in Naples, by the Aphrodisian Koblanos.141The Sorrento statue drawsattention to the association of Herakles hip herms with athletics, education, and, ultimately,philosophy. The head of the Corinth Herakles is similar in general to that of the Herakles herm in the Terme Museum, which has been associated with an Athenian prototype of the mid-5th century B.C.142The Corinth Herakles shows different proportions from those of the Terme head, however,for the head is rounder, the mouth is smaller,and the beard is longer and thicker.It closely resembles the head of the Copenhagen/Dresden Herakles type, especially the version in Rokeby Hall.143The configuration of the forehead, hair,and beard of these two heads is verylike, and the similarityof the eyes and cheeks is striking. The patterns of the hair locks also agree, although the hair of the Corinth version has fewer chiseled details. The Copenhagen/Dresden type derivesfrom a prototype of ca. 360 B.C., in which the body is nude, leaning on a club, and the head is turned to its left. The Copenhagen/Dresden head type is here combined with a body format, with the bent right arm enveloped by the mantle, that is associatedwith philosophers and poets. It recallsthe famous 4th-centuryB.C. statue of Sophokles thatwasset up in the Theater of Dionysos in Athens (Paus. 1.21.1), which is probably reflected by the complete version in the Lateran Collections in Rome.144 The rendering of the Herakles hip herm displaysa reductive approach familiarfrom Corinth. Treatment of the hair and beard is relatively plastic, the handling of the cheeks and mouth, soft and warm. The brow is battered, but enough remains of the eyes to show that they may have been striking features. They are opened wide (wider than in the Rokeby Hall head), in a manner common to statues of Herakles, and are large in proportion to the mouth. The narrow lids are of even width, the lower having a marked curve, like those of the head in Rokeby Hall. The main examples of the Copenhagen/Dresden Herakles type are thought to come from Rome. In order to establish the date of carving, the rendering of the eyes can be compared with Roman portraits. General similarityto a portrait of Trajanin Copenhagen from the end of his reign may be noted, but a closer comparison can be made between the sharp outline and shape of Herakles' left eye and that of a portrait in London of ca. A.D. 120-130.145Although the eyebrowsof the Corinth piece are abraded, the outline of the breaksand the shape of the projection suggest that the browswere plasticallyrendered, a treatment that would be commensurate with the rest of the head. Mouths that are narrow in proportion to other features, as here, also become a regular feature of portraiture ca. A.D. 120-130.146 Since the bearded hero in Corinth assumes the attitude of a Greek philosopher, it is not surprising that a philosopher portrait in Athens dated ca. A.D. 140, which Hekler tentativelyidentified as Polemon, bears a generic resemblance. Somewhat similar is the soft treatment of the small locks, curling tightly at the ends, on the cheeks.147Closer are the wide-opened eyes on a appear more frequently than Herakles; see Matz 1968-1975, IV, p. 559. 141. BrBr, no. 614: Ruesch 1908, no. 212; Muthmann 1951, p. 17. Cf. supports for statues of victorious athletes in Rome and Istanbul: LIMC IV, p. 783, nos. 1146, 1147, s.v. Herakles (Palagia); Arnold 1969, p. 132, pl. 15:b; similarly, the symbolism for victorious athletes underlies the choice of Herakles' Labors for the metopes of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia. Herakles herms on East Greek grave stelai may also refer to education and athletics; see Pfuhl-Mobius, I, no. 138, pl. 32; no. 141, pl. 32; no. 161, pl. 35; no. 256, pl. 48; no. 646, pl. 98; no. 730, pl. 110; Zanker 1993, p. 220, figs. 4, 5, 27; and Ridgway 1993b, p. 235, on possible funerary symbolism. 142. Fuchs in Helbig4, III, no. 2335, ca. 440-430 B.c.; MusNazRom, I, 5, no. 66. Cf. also the colossal head from Tivoli in the British Museum (inv. 1734), after a 5th-century statue (Raeder 1983, no. I 11; Furtwangler 1895, p. 223); D6rig 1977,

figs. 13,15; and LIMCIV,p. 751, no. 429, s.v.Herakles(Palagia). 143. On the RokebyHall replica of EarlyImperialdate, see Boschung 2000, pl. 2. For a discussion of the Copenhagen/ Dresden type, see Moreno 1982, pp. 406-409, 486-489; of the Copenhagen statue, LIMCIV, p. 762, no. 667, s.v. Herakles (Palagia). 144. Now in the Vatican Museums: Fuchs 1983, fig. 115; Helbig4,I, no. 1066. 145. Trajan:Poulsen 1974, no. 34, pl. 56; Johansen 19941995, II, p. 96, no. 34. London, BM 1909:Daltrop 1958, pp. 5960, 71, 89, 117, fig. 49. 146. Cf. London, BM 1975: Daltrop 1958, pp. 56, 117, fig. 32; Rome, Capitoline Museums, Sala del Fauno 15: Daltrop 1958, p. 121, figs. 35, 36. 147. Athens, NM 427: Hekler 1940, p. 125, figs. 6, 7; Richter 1965, III, p. 285, figs. 2034-2037; Datsouli-Stavridi1985, pp. 46-47, pls. 44, 45; Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 73.

124

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

head from Crete, probably an Early Hadrianic private portrait.'48 The latter points toward a Hadrianic date for the Theater Herakles. A striking likeness to the Herakles in the Boar Labor of the Corinth Theater reliefs lends support to this date and suggests that they may be products of the same workshop.149 The mouth is a distinctive feature. Herakles' mouth is slightly open, leaving visible inside a separately carved segment with a convex curve. This configuration can be recognized in another idealized figure at Corinth-the head of a youth associated with Temple E.150An Antonine date has been suggested for the second phase of Temple E, but its chronology is still under study.151As the Corinth Herakles herm was found near the eastern end of the stage, it probably stood in that vicinity, perhaps within the colonnade. It definitely would not have stood at the front of the stage in Late Roman times, as that area was eliminated during the Theater's conversion into an arena in the first half of the 3rd century A.C. ON THE EAST STAGE (23, 24) 23

Chiron

P1. 38

23A Seated horse P1. 38:a-c S-2804/3753. S-2804: Theater, on stage, near east end, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, pp. 466-467). S-3753, right foreleg: Museum marble pile. Horse: p.H. ca. 0.62, W. 0.579, W. torso in front 0.305; plinth: p.H. front 0.110, back 0.350, p.L. 1.520, p.W. front 0.545, back 0.420 m. Fivejoining fragments; horse broken diagonally from haunch to genitals and through left front hock, right foreleg. Heavy weathering; missing some chips. Bibliography: Shear 1928b, p. 479; Robinson 1969; Kemp-Lindemann 1975, pp. 32-33; Ridgway 1981b, p. 443; LIMCIII, pp. 244-245, no. 89, s.v. Cheiron(GislerHuwiler); LIMC I, p. 51, no. 77, s.v. Achilleus (KossatzDeissmann); Rogge 1995, p. 105, note 134, agrees with the identification as Chiron and speculates that it may have been part of a group. 23B Fragment of horse anatomy P1. 38:d S-3596. Museum basement marble pile, probably from Shear's excavations. P.L. 0.272, p.W. 0.170, p.Th. 0.086 m. Single fragment; broken all around. Chipped. PI. 38:e 23C Fragment of horse flank S-3597. Museum basement marble pile, probably from Shear's excavations. P.L. 0.423, p.W. 0.155, p.Th. 0.118 m. Twojoining fragments, flank; broken all around. Surface chipped. 148. Athens, NM 357: see Datsouli-Stavridi 1985, pp. 40-41, pl. 36, where it is argued to be a representation of the deified Plotina, after A.D. 121; but cf. Fittschen and Zanker 1983, no. 7, note 5, where it is interpreted as a private portrait of Hadrianic date, and Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 70, as a private portrait with characteristics of Plotina, A.D. 120-130; on its reworking, Weber 1999. 149. On the possibility of a local workshop, see Sturgeon 1989. On the boar relief, see CorinthIX, ii, no. H13. Cf. esp. the side views of the Theater herm, PI. 37:c, d. 150. The youth (S-1539/1570) was found west of the temple

23A-C: Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. These three fragments derive from a seated horse, roughly life-size. 23A represents the rear portion of the horse, sitting on a high plinth; the front feet are advanced and flat on the ground. The figure faces foward on the plinth, which slopes down toward the front. The position of the rear legs and of the tail, which curves to the right, under the haunch, and over the right leg, gives no impression of imminent motion. The right leg (at the knee) and the inside of the haunch are more deeply worked than the left, so the upper torso and head may have faced viewer's left. The right hoof is somewhat closer to the torso than the left. There are no clamp cuttings or signs of attachment to a second figure on the plinth, which appears to be missing only minor chips across the front edge. The right foreleg, which was carved separately, joins the right forefoot; the dowel holes and ancient cement correspond. The back of the rump is roughly worked with a heavy claw chisel, while a drove was used on the inner sides of the haunches. The parts of the figure that were likely to be visible were probably more carefully finished, judging by the variation in treatment on the preserved portion, which is much smoother on the front portions of the upper rear legs and rougher on the lowest portions of the haunches.152 23B preserves a broadly curving segment of animal anatomy and may represent a portion of a horse's haunch. Light rasping is evident over most surfaces. 23C resembles the inward-curving left flank of an equine figure. The curved break suggests that the flank adjoined a

podium in a location separate from two other heads associated with Temple E; see Corinth I, ii, pp. 216-219 (where wrongly identified as a girl), nos. 6, 11, figs. 172, 177; and Ridgway 1981b, p. 441. 151. On the Antonine date, see Haskell 1980. For discussion of possible chronological phases of the building, see Williams and Zervos 1990, pp. 333-336, where building activity is indicated for pre-A.D. 38/9, the last quarter of the 1st century A.C., the Antonine period, and the late 2nd century. 152. Robinson 1969, figs. 2-6 on pl. 53.

ON THE EAST STAGE

sharply bent rear left leg, as if the piece comes from a seated figure. The piece would then fit flat against the rear left side of the horse. The front surface is relatively

125

smoothlyfinished, the upper and rear surfacesare more roughly worked. 2nd century

A.C.

Robinson has convincingly identified the large segment of a seated horse (23A) as Chiron, the mythological centaur and instructor of Achilles. He has dated the statue to the early 3rd century

on the basis of historical and technical inferences. In an extended discussion, he suggested that the statue was produced as part of a hasty remodeling of the orchestra in preparation for a visit from the emperor Caracalla, who was fond of likening himself to Achilles, and that the "unfinished" (his emphasis) state of the sculpture is proof of the abandonment of the project upon the death of Caracalla in A.D. 217. What Robinson has interpreted as lack of finish on the preserved (rear) portion of the animal, however, does not seem applicable to the statue as a whole. Examples of striking differences in tooling from the front to back can be seen on sculptures in the East of dates as early as Early Imperial, for example, in theJulio-Claudian reliefs from the Sebasteion at Aphrodisias.153 Chiron, with a young musician, may have been situated onstage against the rear wall of the stage building as an allegory for dramatic reading and instruction. This group may be a reflection of an earlier sculptural group or painting of Chiron and Achilles, like that pictured in the fresco from the Basilica at Herculaneum.154 Chiron is typically seated when instructing Achilles in athletics or lyre playing. Sarcophagi in St. Petersburg, Naples, and London represent Chiron instructing Achilles in athletics.155In these reliefs, Chiron holds a crooked staff that rests near his feet, an object for which no evidence survives on the Corinth plinth. Such a staff could have been attached in front of the front right hoof, however, where the front edge of the plinth and of the hoof are missing. On the other hand, Chiron does not usually hold a staff when giving music lessons, as in the Herculaneum fresco or Copenhagen gem.156Hence, it does not seem a necessary part of the subject, although it may have been desirable for its function as a support in a marble group. According to depictions of this scene on lamps, Achilles can be represented carrying a bag and nude; the Herculaneum fresco, however, shows him carrying a lyre and wearing a chlamys, pulled back to expose the torso.157The best candidate for a young musician here is the youth in chlamys (24), which is a figure of appropriate age and dress. Although there is little evidence, a date sometime in the 2nd century A.C. seems possible for each, considering the date of most of the sculptural assemblage from the Theater. The fragmentary horse withers (13A) provide evidence of a second equine statue in the Theater. The statues of Chiron, the horse, and Pan (21) seem in keeping with the Corinthians' love of animal sculptures, of different subjects and sizes, which were displayed in various locations in the Theater complex.158 The sloping plinth, which finds comparisons in sculptures from the Theater of Pompey in Rome and the theater at Leptis Magna, may indicate an optical adjustment for its particular location.159 A.C.

153. Smith 1987, esp. pls. XI:1, XIII:3, XIX:1, 3, XXI:1, 3, XXIII:3, 4, where such differences are quite clear. See Smith 1988b, p. 51, for the date. 154. For a discussion of possible groups of Chiron and Achilles in the round, see Robinson 1969, pp. 194-196, note 21; see also Robertson 1975, pp. 583-584, for the argument that Chiron and the lyre-playing Achilles had appeared already by the 4th century B.C. in a painting by Athenion, which possibly anticipated a sculptural group, although a copy has not been recognized. Pliny (HN36.29) records a group of Chiron with Achilles in the Saepta Julia in Rome (see Bieber 1961b, p. 147; Sichtermann 1957, pls. 16-18; and LIMC I, p. 48, no. 50, s.v. Achilleus [Kossatz-Deissmann]), but it cannot be identified with any certainty; cf. also Schiffler 1976; Kemp-Lindemann 1975, pp. 18-35, esp. pp. 32-33. On the Herculaneum fresco, Naples,

Museo Nazionale 9109, see Herrmann and Herbig 1906-1950, pl. 82; LIMC I, pp. 48-49, no. 51, s.v. Achilleus (KossatzDeissmann), with bibliography; and Stenico 1963, pl. 80. 155. Robinson 1969, figs. 11-13 on pl. 54. 156. Fresco: see above, note 154. Gem: LIMC I, p. 49, no. 57e, s.v. Achilleus (Kossatz-Deissmann). 157. Lamp (Broneer type XXII): Wright 1980, pp. 161-162, no. 115, pl. 33, possibly local. For a hand holding a pouch, from the Theater, see 74C, which was probably held by the Hermes in the East Theater Plaza. 158. For depictions of Pan, see 21; other examples include, e.g., a hippocamp (S-2678) and an eagle (S-2777). 159. Rome: Bertoletti et al. 1997, pp. 76-78, no. 11.69; Helbig4, II, no. 1789; Coarelli 1971-1972, pp. 107-110, figs. 36, found on the Via Arenula, near the southwest corner of the

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

126 24

Youth in chlamys, musician(?)

Pls. 39, 40

Pls. 39, 40:a 24A Lower torso S-3585. Theater, as indicated by a photograph of excavations of the 1920s, probably 1926. P.H. 0.703, L. waist to top of knee 0.502, W. waist 0.238, Th. 0.243 m. Single fragment; statue broken across midtorso and below knees, missing all of right arm. Chips from edges of drapery; most surfaces are heavily weathered. The upper surface is roughly picked where it was intentionally cut from the upper torso, probably for reuse in a wall. P1. 40:b 24B Draped right shoulder T-256. Theater. Larger fragment: east end of stage building, northeast of eastern niche on back side of scaenae frons, section 5e, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 381). P.L. 0.231, p.W. 0.142, p.Th. 0.100 m. Two joining fragments; torso broken horizontally across top of shoulder, diagonally through back to middle of ribs. Joining edges chipped. 24A-B: Marble, white, fine to medium grained; micaceous. These two pieces are associated due to their similar marble, scale, and workmanship. Preserved is a draped male figure (24A), standing with his weight on his right leg, the left knee forward, and leaning on a now missing object, attached separately at left.160The youth wears a chlamys, once fastened at the right shoulder, the edge folded back to reveal the right buttock and most of the groin and right leg. One corner of the cloak is preserved between the knees, but on the left it extends below the knee, so it may have reached to midcalf, perhaps to emphasize his youth. Linear folds cross the chest in conflicting directions, bearing little relationship to the anatomy except perhaps to convey the flatness of the chest. The garment is nearly transparent over the left thigh, contrasting with the nude right leg. The torso's left contour is clearly indicated, and is emphasized by the hanging drapery. The elongated proportions are striking from a three-quarter viewpoint. 24B depicts the back of a draped right shoulder. The shallow folds and sketchy treatment indicate that this is the back of a statue wearing a chlamys that covers most of the front and back of the torso. The right arm was attached separately via a flat, smoothed surface, scored with a flat-chisel edge, and using two dowels: one cut

perpendicularlyinto the joining surface, the other at an angle close to the edge. The draperyis wrapped over the left arm, freeing the hand, which extended forwardholding an object; both the left hand and the object were separatelyattached. The object rested against the left forearm in a groove prepared to receive it (which extends ca. 0.09 m up the arm from the draperyedge above the wrist);and it was fastened to the arm by an iron pin, which has caused orange discoloration around it and the end of which remains.The narrowdiameter (ca. 0.01 m) of the groove for the object and the figure'sage and clothing preclude this being a weapon, but rather, suggest a caduceus,a musical instrument such as an aulos,a walking stick, or the stem of a victor'spalm. The narrownessmay suggest a metal rather than marble attachment. The left hand was inserted near the wrist into a prepared surface (0.075 x 0.075 m), where it was secured by two dowels (resembling the two dowels that attached the right armto 24B): one vertical(diam.0.023 m), the other adjacent to it and horizontal (diam. 0.010 m). The end of the horizontal pin remains in situ. Cut into the drapery immediately below the socket for the left wrist is a long verticalcutting (p.L. 0.355, W. on flat inner surface 0.025, W. outer surface 0.035 [top]-0.065 [bottom] m), which curvesgraduallytowardthe statue at the top, indicating the line of attachmentof a marble accessory.This long cutting contains no dowel hole, so the insert would have functioned as a large marble tenon that fit securely by itself and was masked by the drapery edge. On the surface prepared to receive the insert, marksof a point and a round-ended chisel are smoothed, as if to create a tight-fittingjoin.Presumablythe tightness of the tenon's fit as well as the base that the attachment sat on would have kept the attachment in place. The side addition probablyacted as an attributeas well as a statue support, which would account for the figure leaning awayfrom the weight leg. The outlines of the garment are carved in back, but are not rendered in detail, suggesting that the piece was set up against a wall. A dowel cutting (diam. ca. 0.01, depth ca. 0.01 m) in the draperynear the lower end of the right buttock is too small to pin the figure into a niche, but a larger cutting could have existed in the upper back. The original height would be about life-sizeor slightly under for a preadolescent boy. The elongated proportions contribute to the impression of youth. 2nd century A.c.

This sculpture represents a youth, perhaps 12-14 years of age, wearing a chlamys, carrying an object resting against his left arm, and leaning against a now missing object at left. This mode of representation, a figure fully enveloped by the chlamys, derives ultimately from a 5th-century B.C. type once identified as Phokion by Visconti and represented by statues in the Terme and Vatican Museums in Rome, from which later variations develop.161A sizable number of Roman portico of the Theater of Pompey. Leptis Magna: Caputo and Traversari 1976, pp. 58-59, no. 37, pl. 34. No sloping plinths like this are illustrated in Fuchs 1987, though many statues have lost their plinths. 160. It is far more common for supports or decorative attributes for marble sculpture to be worked from the same block; piecing of stone sculptures with stone in the Corinthia in the Roman period is attested as a common practice by the cult statue

group from the Temple of Poseidon at Isthmia (Isthmia IV, nos. 18, 19; cf. also nos. 137, 138, the feet). 161. Museo Nazionale 8583: MusNazRom,I, 5, no. 61. Vatican (the head does not belong): Ridgway 1970, p. 68, fig. 113; Helbig4, I, no. 502; LIMC V, p. 365, no. 926, s.v. Hermes (Siebert). The type also appears as a body herm; cf. the Conservatori piece: Mustilli 1939, p. 183, no. 92, fig. 441, pl. 115.

ON THE EAST STAGE

127

statues conform to the so-called Phokion type, but their missing heads often preclude certainty regarding the subject's identity, which, as here, could be Hermes, another young mythological figure, or a portrait.162On the Terme version, the chlamys covers most of the figure in front and

reaches to above the knees, but leaves the sides bare, although not as exposed as on the Corinth youth. The exposure of a figure's sides and flanks to indicate youthfulness is a motif that was used in 5th-century B.C. works, like the relief of the Girl with the Doves and the Parthenon frieze.163 The drapery arrangement recalls that of a possible Hermes from Tivoli in the Vatican Muse-

ums, which W. Fuchs suggested stems from a late-4th-centuryArgive or Sikyonianwork in the continuing tradition of the Polykleitan school.64 Arnold, however, interpreted it as a Roman creation because of the changed relationship between the body and the drapery.'65The statue from the Corinth Theater creates a somewhat different impression from its Greek predecessors,

since more of the right side is exposed; this is perhaps due to the leaning pose and because the cloak clings to the torso, revealing more of the body. Furthermore, the proportions and stance do not appear to be Polykleitan,but reflect some slimmer 4th-centuryand Hellenistic statues of adolescent youths.166On the Vatican statue, the chlamys is marked by a series of V-shaped fold

patterns over the front. The patterns in the Theater statue seem to represent a fracturedversion of this rendering, with few folds of equal depth actually meeting. The folds are rendered as wide,

shallow grooves, some of which are nearly straight, in disjointed patterns. Identical in stance and drapery arrangement is a statue from Athens published by DatsouliStavridi, who dates it to the Augustan period.167The Athens statue has a series of V-shaped folds

over the left side of the torso, which are more plastically rendered than those here. Like the Corinth piece, emphasis is given to the partially exposed groin and to transparent drapery at left. The Attic piece is a larger work of better quality and more sculptural effects than its Corinthian counterpart, which appears inspired by this Augustan type. Although the head does not survive, some indications as to the identity of the Athenian figure are provided by its youth (the pubic area is hairless) and by the laurel branch and snake on the support adjoining the right leg, which

suggest that it may represent the young Apollo or a youth in the guise of Apollo.168 Closer to the Corinth statue in rendering of draperyarrangement and fold patterns are sculptures from the 2nd century A.C., such as the so-called Man and Dog Relief in Corinth. StefanidouTiveriou, who proposes that the body type in the relief is taken from that of Antinous, has suggested that it represents one of the pupils of Herodes Atticus, through comparison with the relief of Polydeukion from Brauron.169 Hugo Meyer interprets it, rather, as a depiction of Antinous.170 In the absence of the head it is impossible to be sure. The Theater youth, in comparison to the Man and Dog Relief, shows more movement (note the sharp indentation at the waist) and also a more realistic rendering of the nude torso than the excessively smooth, idealized, and flattened body of the hunter in the Man and Dog Relief. The drapery folds of the Theater youth, on the other hand, are less organic, and the shallow grooves of more uncertain 162. Some adaptations of this draped figure, with the garment covering the torso more completely, are used to portray imperial officials, as in the statue from the Hadrianic Baths at LeptisMagna,in Tripoli,ArchaeologicalMuseum39:Bartoccini 1929, pp. 163-165, figs. 174-177; Manderscheid 1981, p. 108, no. 328, pl. 41, H. 1.81 m; dated Late Hadrianicby Kruse(1975, note 744). 163. Doves relief, New York, MMA 27.45: Lippold 1950, p. 176, pl. 64:1.Parthenonfrieze,North XLII,figure at farright: Brommer 1977, pls. 107, 108. 164. Amelung VatKat,I, pp. 155-157, pl. 21, BraccioNuovo 132; Fuchs in Helbig4,I, no. 460. 165. Arnold 1969, p. 211, note 720. 166. Cf. Fuchs 1983, figs. 102 (Eros), 104 (young satyr),106 (Marathon boy); and Smith 1991, figs. 44:2 (Sisyphos II), 77 (Dionysos). 167. NM 4476: Datsouli-Stavridi1984, p. 163, pl. 12:d, e;

Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 24. 168. On depictions of Apollo with snake and laurel,cf. LIMC II, pp. 193-194, no. 39f, s.v. Apollon(Palagia), Lykeios type, Louvre 916; p. 197, no. 66, relief from theater at Miletos. For RomanApolloswith kitharaand/or other objectsat the figure's side, see LIMCII,pp. 209-210, nos. 196, 197, 200i, s.v.Apollon (Lambrinoudakis); and pp. 374, 403-404, nos. 39, 274, s.v. (Simon). Apollon/Apollo 169. S-187/196/250: CorinthIX,p. 121, no. 247; StefanidouTiveriou 1977, pl. 8; Wiseman 1979, p. 508; Ridgway1981b, p. 437. Polydeukion:Papadimitriou1962, p. 33, fig. 42; Daux 1963, p. 710, fig. 17; Dow and Vermeule 1965, pp. 294-295, pl. 68:b (just two fragments). 170. Meyer 1991, no. VI 2; see also Ajootian 1999, on the high relief from the Lechaion Road basilica, possibly Hadrianic.

128

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

meaning than the highly logical fold patterns on the relief. The chlamys of Hermes on Slab I of the bema reliefs in the Theater of Dionysos in Athens, dated to ca. A.D. 140-150, similarly has sharply angled folds over the chest.171The Apollo Kitharoidos at Corinth, which has straight, noncontinuous folds in front, in combination with short drill channels and struts in the hair and high polish, probably dates from the late 2nd to early 3rd century A.C.172The Theater youth shows no trace of high polish, perhaps because it was designed for an architectural setting, but its fold lines seem more disconnected than those of the Apollo. The loss of the head makes assessment of a date difficult, but local comparisons suggest it was made in the mid- to late 2nd century A.C., which would also suit the elongated proportions.173 The Theater statue may represent Hermes or a youth characterized as a traveler or hunter, possibly likened to Apollo and/or Hermes/Mercury.174 Although the sculpture may seem too well finished to stand beside Chiron (23), it is possible: the rough treatment of Chiron's back side does not create an unacceptable disparity, for it does not necessarily reflect the appearance of the front. The statue might also represent a young musician who accompanied choruses or a victor in a musical contest, holding a victory palm. The statue base that supported the bronze statue of a boy victor (71), found in the Peristyle Court, provides an example of a young victor's statue set up in the Theater complex. If the large piece added at left here was a kithara, the statue might depict a victor in a musical contest that was set up next to Chiron, as if showing him with his teacher (as discussed above regarding 23). Depictions of Achilles with Chiron, a popular type that may have provided a model, sometimes show Achilles holding a large kithara at his left.175 The sculptor may have lowered the instrument to the ground in consideration of its weight. The adaptability of this statuary type is illustrated by the marble statuette from Epidauros of the early 3rd century A.c., the base of which bears a dedication to Telesphoros.176 IN THE PORTA REGIA (25, 26) The statues of Antinous as Apollo in Lykeios pose (25) and Dionysos as Kitharoidos (26) are restored standing beside the two forward columns of the porta regia. The sculptures are associated because they are both made of Thasian dolomitic marble, are over life-size, and were found in part in the 1902 and 1903 trenches located in the central stage area (see Plan I). Thasian marble, a material that becomes popular in Greece in the Trajanic period and continues in use thereafter, has not been found among the other Theater sculptures.177Antinous as Apollo and ta hey are made of the Dionysos very likely together represent a single dedication. The fact that marble that is distinct from the rest of the sculptural assemblage of the 2nd-century theater suggests that they were added later than the major Hadrianic phase of decoration of the scaenae frons in the 120s. They appear datable to ca. A.D. 130-138. 171. Herbig 1935, pp. 40, 57-59, pl. 12:3; the drapery of "Theseus" on Slab IV also has sharply angled cross-folds (pl. 15:2). On the date, see Despinis 2003, pp. 141-142. 172. S-814: Corinth IX, pp. 22-23, no. 12 (without head); LIMCII, p. 386, no. 65e, s.v. Apollon/Apollo, as Apollo Musagetes (without photo) (Simon). 173. For figures with elongated proportions on sarcophagi, cf. Strong 1988, figs. 168, 169 (Sidamara sarcophagus in Istanbul, Museum of Antiquities 1179; Badminton sarcophagus in New York, MMA 55.11.5). 174. For examples of individuals in the guise of Mercury, see Wrede 1981, pp. 273-283; and Clairmont 1966, nos. 33, 59. Portraits of Antinous exerted some influence on later portraiture; see, e.g., Wrede 1981, p. 273, note 24; and Meyer 1991, pp. 68-69. 175. See under 23, notes 154, 156. For a bronze Apollo with a large kithara that was probably standing in a similar location at its left, see the Apollo from Isriye (Gografe 1996, esp. fig. 3).

I owe this reference to C. Keesling. For the shape of the kithara, which has long, nearly vertical sides, and its use as an attribute of Apollo, see Maas and McIntosh Snyder 1989, pp. 53-78; of the 19 examples illustrated, most, if set on the ground, would reach the top of the thigh, if not the waist, of the figure holding it. Hence, the size of the cutting in the Theater sculpture seems appropriate for a kithara. 176. Athens, NM 281, H. 0.43 m with the base: Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 119, early 3rd century; Raftopoulou 2000, pp. 76-79, probably 2nd century; Katakis 2002, pp. 37-38, no. 34, probably 3rd century. 177. A program of isotopic testing organized byJ. Herrmann, carried out on certain sculptures in the National Museum in Athens, has shown that the following are of Thasian dolomitic marble: Rhomiopoulou 1997, nos. 10 (ca. 10 B.c.), 43 (early 2nd century A.C.), 70 (ca. A.D. 120-130), 72 (ca. A.D. 120), 78 (ca. A.D. 125-130), 79 (A.D. 130-138), 88 (A.D. 161), and 95 (ca. A.D. 152).

IN THE PORTA REGIA 25

Antinous as Apollo in Lykeios pose

Pls. 40, 41

25A Fragment from the head P1. 40:c S-639b. Theater, tr. 34b, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 75). P.L. 0.176, p.W. 0.068, Th. 0.049 m. Single fragment, preserving parts of several locks. 25B Fragment from the head P1. 40:d S-3561/3699. Old Museum marble pile, probably from Theater excavations. Joined 1993. P.L. 0.306, p.W. 0.164, p.Th. 0.088, L. top crown through lowest lock 0.230 m (this corresponds to the distance from near the central crown to just below the ear). Three joining fragments. Many surfaces exhibit considerable abrasion, weathering, and some encrustation, as well as some calcification and graying, as from exposure to fire. The best-preserved surfaces are on the curls that would have been lower on the head. 25C Upper torso P1. 41 S-3546. Inner Museum courtyard, from the early excavations, year and provenance unknown. P.L. 0.626, W. across shoulders 0.574, W. waist 0.377, max. D. 0.298, p.L. central front 0.388 m. Single fragment; broken below base of neck, through shoulders, and from upper right thigh to waist at left. Surfaces grayed from weathering, some of it modern; front surface pitted. Bibliography: Milleker 1986, pp. 227-228, no. 6, pl. 26, for Late Hadrianic or Early Antonine date.178 25D Right hand P1. 40:e S-976. Theater, tr. 34a, north extension, near basin level, 1910. P.L. 0.103, W. 0.099, Th. 0.078 m. Single fragment; broken across base of palm, base of all fingers. Back of hand chipped. 25A-D: Marble, gray, with very large, glassy crystals; identified as Thasian dolomitic by geologist S. Pike (1997). These four pieces are grouped from their similarity of material, over life-size scale, style, technique, and weath-

129

ering. 25A and 25B derive from a male figure with hair in thick curls waving in alternating directions. Longer locks adhere to the scalp, more closely over the upper crown, shortening and thickening near the face and neck. Thicker curls are outlined and undercut with a small drill (diam. 0.0015 m). Most drill channels, visible where curl edges haveworn away,contain a seriesof small holes made by a stationarydrill, probably necessitated This by the hardness of the Thasiandolomitic marble.179 technique is evident in all areas, but it is most obvious on the section from the left side of the back of the head (25A). Crisp chiseling details strands within the locks in the thicker hair, while finer incisions are applied diagonally to render individual hairs. The skin surface has a very finely polished finish. 25C depicts a nude male torso from a frontal statue with the weight on the right leg. The right arm was raised sharply, as if to rest on the head; while the left, held down, back, and out from the body, could have been placed on the hip, but more likely rested on a support at the side. A slight twist in the upper torso shows that the head faced proper left. The stretched right side is contrasted with the contracted left, where ribs are carved in low relief. There is no trace of a mantle at the lower break. The surface is well preserved on the sides, the original, careful smoothing and polish evident under the arm. The top of the shoulders and back are lightly rasped, but the back is carefully modeled. 25D is the right hand, held in partially closed position. The outside of the hand is highly polished, the inside partially smoothed. The evenly rounded surface gives the impression of a slightly fleshy figure. The skin between the thumb and first finger is rendered with sharp creases, which seems typical with this marble. This hand is comparable in scale and rounded surface to the right hand of the sleeved deity (26C), and contrasts sharply with the strength conveyed by the veined left hand that held a spear made of similar marble (S-414), found at Roman levels over the South Stoa. The intentionally fleshy character seems appropriate for the subject of Antinous. Late Hadrianic.

Identification of Antinous can be suggested here through the style and hair arrangement of 25A, one of two pieces in this group known to have been found in the Theater. A second piece from the head (25B) also corresponds closely with the known coiffure of Antinous. The broad break across the top of 25B probably reflects the position of the right arm crossing the head, which would have faced proper left. The broad, fleshy configuration of the torso 25C, found in the early excavations, assumes the pose of the Apollo Lykeios, which makes its association with the head 25A/B attractive. The coiffure is paralleled on a bust from Patras with whose locks those of the Corinth sculpture have a one-to-one correspondence. The comparison is facilitated by reference to Clairmont's numbered diagram of major curl groups.180The locks from the Corinth sculpture derive from the left and right sides of the back of the head and from the thick curl over the right ear. 25A 178. I associated this torso with the head of 25 in 1986. Milleker (1986, pp. 227-228) independently arrived at a similar identification for the torso. 179. On Thasian dolomitic marble, see Herrmann 1990 and Heller and Herz 1995.

180. Clairmont 1966, pl. 38. Patras bust, Athens, NM 417: Clairmont 1966, p. 24, no. 3, pl. 38; Datsouli-Stavridi 1985, p. 48, pl. 46; Meyer 1991, no. I 7, pl. 5. Cf. also Athens, NM 418, 518: Clairmont 1966, nos. 2, 4, pl. 6; Meyer 1991, no. I 8, pl. 6; no. I 9, pl. 7; pp. 213-235, pls. 146, 147.

130

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

occupies the area at the middle of the left back; its long curl has the shape of Clairmont's lock d5. On 25B, the thick curl over the right ear probably preserves the shape of Clairmont's lock b8 and the area around it.181Other locks on 25B resemble Clairmont's locks d4 and d3 together with the top of his dl, while the locks just to the right of these resemble Clairmont's b5 and b6. The shapes and location of the curl groups, as well as similar marble, scale, and technique make association of the two parts of the head convincing. The surviving sections from the right side are those that would be seen from the primary viewing angle, with the head facing left. The Corinth Theater head follows the main type of Antinous portraits. Many Antinous heads have heavy drillwork in the hair framing the face, in contrast to lank, undrilled hair in back. The Corinth head is similar to Munich, Glyptothek 400 in the way the hair is treated as a compact mass and the locks are defined by parallel drill channels.182 Like the Farnese Antinous in Naples, the Theater head has deeper drill channels outlining locks about the face and relative autonomy of individual locks.183The very fine chiseling of outer hair surfaces and strong, shadow-casting drill channels recall Louvre Ma 313, and the thicker, rounder locks from the right side of the head are like those of Vatican, Busti 357.184The dates of these heads establish a date of ca. A.D. 130 for the Corinth Antinous, that is, relatively early in the series. Although the general impression given by the torso is one of fleshiness rather than muscularity, the broad proportions suggest a powerful figure. A sensuous impression is developed through the breadth of form, the languid twist, and the emphasis on fleshy areas around the pectoral muscles and nipples, which are differentiated. Moreover, the fleshy torso suggests that of an adolescent, as found in portraits of Antinous, and the classicizing character suggests that the figure is likened to a deity.185The pose, with right arm resting on the head facing left and the weight on the right leg, follows the Apollo Lykeios type, which is also employed for Antinous in a statue found in the Baths at Leptis Magna.186The Leptis Magna figure, however, wears an ivygrape wreath and a variant hairstyle. The Theater Antinous head and torso are currently the only recognized depictions of Antinous from Corinth. They have a nearby companion at Isthmia, but the Isthmian figure is of a finegrained, sugary marble, which isotopic analysis has identified as from Carrara, so there is no indication of a workshop connection.187 The Isthmian head, however, might be posited as a model, since it also exhibits deep drillwork and fine engraving techniques in the hair. The Isthmian portrait differs, however, in being wreathed, pieced, and more heavily drilled. The popularity of Antinous in the Peloponnese is certain, for his portraits have been found at Argos, Luku, and Patras (two busts), in addition to those at Delphi and Eleusis.'88 The Lykeios type appears elsewhere at Corinth in an over life-size head of Dionysos from the Roman Forum. As the latter is of a similar coarse-grained, sparkling white marble and close in date, the two may be products of the same workshop, active in Corinth in Late Hadrianic to Antonine times.189 The precise findspot of 25A is not recorded, but the evidence of the known area of excavation in 1903 (see Plan I) suggests that this portrait was set up within the curve of the porta regia. The large-grained marble may indicate that the piece was not carved as part of the primary sculptural assemblage in the colonnade, but as a separate, possibly later dedication. Careful work on the 181. See also Datsouli-Stavridi1980 on the Antinous from Kriekouki(Mantinea), Athens, NM 698. 182. Meyer 1991, p. 57, no. I 37, pl. 39. Cf. also Daltrop 1958, figs. 49, 55, 56. 183. Naples, Museo Nazionale 6030: Meyer 1991, pp. 5759, no. I 38, pls. 40-42. Cf. Wegner 1956, pls. 20, 21:b;Daltrop 1958, p. 114, fig. 56; and p. 117, fig. 49. 184. Louvre: Meyer 1991, pp. 62-63, no. I 42, pl. 47. Cf. also Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 685: Meyer 1991, no. I 25, pl. 28, for comparablydetailed chisel work, dated ca. A.D. 130. Palermo, Museo Nazionale 1532: Daltrop 1958, pp. 57, 120, fig. 55, dated ca. A.D. 130. Vatican:Meyer1991, pp. 8788, no. I 66, pl. 76. Cf. Daltrop 1958, p. 114, fig. 56; and Inan

and Alfoldi-Rosenbaum 1979, no. 114, pls. 93, 94, Modius Asiaticus. 185. Cf. Wrede 1981, pp. 34, 207, note 3, 259, note 19, 273, note 24. 186. In Tripolis:Meyer1991, pp. 82-84, no. I 61, pls. 70-72. Cf. Daltrop 1958, p. 120, fig. 55; see also Manderscheid 1981, pp. 107-108, no. 325, pl. 41; Milleker1986;and Schr6der 1989, p. 118, no. A 8, pl. 2. 187. IsthmiaIV, Appendix 3, p. 189, no. 57, found in the colonnade of the Temple of Poseidon; Meyer 1991, no. I 22. 188. Meyer 1991, nos. I 4,1 5,1 7,1 8, 115, I17. 189. S-194:CorinthIX, pp. 31-33, no. 25; LIMCIII,pp. 444445, no. 200a, s.v.Dionysos(Veneri).

IN THE PORTA REGIA

131

back of head and torso mark the sculpture as a high-qualitydedication. Given the pose and the absence of a wreath, Antinous may be shown here in the guise of Apollo Lykeios and as a counterpart to the draped figure of Dionysos as Kitharoidos (26). 26 Dionysos as Kitharoidos 26A Head

P1.42 P1.42:a

S-3698. Found in Old Museum courtyard with other material from the Theater. P.H. 0.207, p.W. 0.097, D. brow to center of hair loop 0.248, rest. W. 0.246, est. H. ca. 0.30 m. Two joining fragments; left side of head broken through left eye and forehead, hair, across right side of hair bunch; missing most of face. Wreath chipped; surface worn and weathered. P1. 42:b 26B Upper arm S-506. Theater, tr. 34b, 3.5 m deep, 1903 (Corinth NB 26, p. 40). P.L. 0.118, W. 0.124, Th. 0.112 m. Single fragment; arm broken at both ends. One side heavily encrusted. 26C Right forearm and hand P1. 42:c S-537. Theater, tr. 34b, central stage building, 3.5 m deep, 1903 (Corinth NB 26, p. 41). P.L. 0.398, W. wrist 0.069, W. upper break 0.106; hand: p.L. 0.120, W. 0.098 m. Three joining fragments; arm broken at elbow. Thumb and first finger were attached via iron dowels, as indicated by a red stain; the other fingers are broken through the middle digits. Surface chipped, with some encrustation. Ample traces of a brownish yellow pigment survive over the lower inside of the sleeve (10YR 6/6), and of a light brown outlining the skin and on the palm (7.5YR 6/3). 26D Upper arm fragment P1. 42:d S-509. Theater, tr. 34b, 3.5 m deep, 1903 (Corinth NB 26, p. 40). P.L. 0.046, W. 0.110, p.Th. 0.072 m. Single fragment; arm broken on one side and through center, at position of dowel cutting. 26E Upper(?) arm fragment S-1018. Theater, tr. 34, 1909. P.L. 0.041, W. 0.106, Th. 0.078 m.

P1. 42:e

Single fragment; arm broken on two ends, through middle. Surface weathered and encrusted. PI. 42:f 26F Left forearm fragment S-3684-25. Museum marble pile. P.L. 0.110, max. W. 0.088, W. at wrist 0.079 m.

Single fragment; arm broken at wrist and through middle of forearm. Inner face weathered and encrusted. 26A-F: Marble, gray, with large, glassy crystals; possibly Thasian. These six pieces are associated because of the similarity of marble, costume, and slightly over life-size scale. Three were inventoried from the Theater excavations of 1903 (26B, 26C, 26D) and one from 1909 (26E), so they were found near the center of the stage building. 26A is a segment from the left side of a head of Dionysos. The deity wears his hair pulled into a loop at the nape, from which strands emerge to hang down the neck. A flat mitra crosses the low forehead, and the figure wears a wreath, from which four large ivy leaves survive; grapes are not represented. The hair is composed of thick, twisting strands emanating from a central part, with softly modeled locks separated by deep drill channels. The drill also undercuts the leaves and the connecting stems. The smooth forehead is low, the eyebrow lightly marked, the eye shallowly set. The upper lid projects, its upper edge set off by a light crease. The pupil is not pierced. The skin is carefully smoothed, not polished, and all rasp marks have been eliminated. The crown and back are much less detailed than the side and front. 26B survives from an upper arm in a sleeved chiton. The plasticity and direction of the folds match those of 26C. The fragment may belong near 26D, although it does notjoin. 26C represents the right forearm and hand from a figure wearing a sleeved chiton. Soft folds in low relief cross the arm diagonally, ending in a hem at the wrist. The hand is open; the thumb and first finger were separately attached, probably holding an object such as a plectrum.The first finger, raised higher than the other three, appears quite active, while the other three are stretched forward together. The hand, turned upward and concave near the wrist, is most smoothly finished on the thumb side, which faced forward. This hand resembles the hand 25D in workmanship. 26D is a segment of a sleeved arm with part of a dowel cutting for piecing, located at the central break (p.L. 0.034 m). Thejoining surface is even, but not completely smoothed. 26F depicts a sleeved left forearm, including the hem at the wrist. 26E is a thin slice from an arm, perhaps from the inside of the elbow. The scale is similar to 26C and 26D, although it is unclear if it was draped. Hadrianic(?).

These fragments, of similar scale and marble, probably derive from a single statue somewhat over life-size, wearing a long-sleeved chiton. Due to the ivy wreath and mitra, this statue is identifiable as Dionysos, who wears a long-sleeved garment when he carries a kithara.190This figure recalls the Apollo Kitharoidos type, which is represented at Corinth by a small figure that was 190. On depictions of Apollo Kitharoidos, see LIMC II, pp. 200-206, nos. 82-155, s.v. Apollon (Palagia), esp. p. 201, no. 101; and LIMCIII, p. 445, no. 205, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri). The Delphi head is identified as Apollo by Palagia who would disassociate the head from the body; autopsy by the author supports this

view, since the head tenon does not fit the body cavity closely, nor does it have a projection or cutting to correspond to the cutting for a tenon at the base of the cavity. For the Delphi figure as Dionysos, see Stewart 1982.

132

STATUES BETWEEN THE COLUMNS

found at the southwest end of the Forum.191The head of the Apollo Kitharoidos type wears a laurel wreath, rather than one of ivy, and long hair bound at the nape. The Dionysos is an appropriate dedication for the Theater, and it may be associated with the statue of Antinous, which is of similar scale and marble. Both figures were found near the center of the stage building and may have formed part of the same dedication, made by a Thasian workshop.192 The head (26A) is marked by a soft treatment of the hair and eye, but a crisp edge for the eyebrow.193Despite heavy weathering, it is evident that the hair over the side of the head is plastically rendered, the waving strands separated by channels cut by a running drill. The soft appearance may be a function of the large-grained marble and the workshop, rather than an indication of a Hellenistic date. In fact, the Thasian marble together with the highly smoothed treatment of the forehead support a Roman date.194Another head of Dionysos from Corinth of very coarse grained marble, which displays a much sharper rendering of hair and eyes, is probably of later, Antonine date.195Since the Theater piece is so fragmentary, it is impossible to tell if it is a reflection of a specific Greek type or if it is a Roman classicizing creation like the Dionysos Jacobsen in Copenhagen or the Dionysos(?) in the British Museum, both of the 2nd century A.C.196The youthful Dionysos is depicted with long sleeves in a number of vase paintings, in which his identity is made clear by the scene, including a relief hydria in St. Petersburg, a hydria in Lyon, and an oinochoe in Athens of the 4th century B.C.197 191. Apollo Kitharoidos,S-814: CorinthIX, pp. 22-23, no. 12 (without head); LIMCII, p. 386, no. 65e, s.v.Apollon/Apollo, as Apollo Musagetes (withoutphoto) (Simon), late 2nd to early 3rd century A.C.

192. For other sculptures of Dionysos in coarse-grained marble at Corinth, see 85, probably Parian, from east of the Theater,and the heads S-194(Lykeiostype), S-2045,and S-2854. 193. Cf. heads on Delos: Marcade1969, no. MN 552, pl. 49; no. MN 429, pl. 73; and Daux 1967, pp. 130, 133, fig. 69. 194. On Thasianmarble in Roman workin Attica,see Agora XI, p. vii. On sculptures in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, identified as Thasian by isotopic analysis,see Herrmann 1990. 195. S-194:CorinthIX, pp. 31-33, no. 25; LIMCIII,pp. 444-

445, no. 200a, s.v.Dionysos(Veneri). 196. DionysosJacobsen:Zanker1974,p. 112, no. 14, pl. 83:1. London, BM 1627: LIMCIII, p. 445, no. 201c, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri);Pochmarski1974, pp. 73-78. 197. St. Petersburg1659, from Cumae:LIMCIII, p. 468, no. 526, s.v.Dionysos(Veneri),carryinga thyrsosand leaning against a tripod. Lyon, from Capua:LIMCIII, p. 468, no. 530, s.v.Dionysos(Veneri); Metzger 1951, pp. 243-244, no. 10, pl. 33:1, seated on an omphalos holding a thyrsos. Athens, Agora P16595:LIMCIII,p. 468, no. 527, s.v.Dionysos(Veneri);Metzger 1965, p. 59, no. 16. Cf. also the Apulian kraterfrom Ceglie, in Bari, Museo Archeologico 4399: LIMCIII, p. 476, no. 641, s.v. Dionysos(Veneri), Dionysos fights a young giant.

8

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX STAGE, ORCHESTRA, CAVEA

including the front of the stage, the orchestra, and the cavea (27-55) (see Plan I). Since in most cases the lack of excavation records does not allow for a more specific designation of findspot, this part of the catalogue has been organized primarily by scale. Large-scale sculptures from the stage to orchestra to lower cavea area are presented first, in the order of heads, torsos, and limb fragments. Statuettes are collected as a single group, followed by altars and other objects. Two large-scale sculptures that can be associated with the upper cavea appear at the end. Sculptures are presented in relation to the general area where they were found, in hopes that the resulting picture may prove useful for contextual studies of sculpture from other building complexes. The sculptures from this area, as elsewhere, are so fragmentary that any statement as to percentages of portraits to idealized sculptures can only be tentative. Most, if not all, of the seven large heads (27-33) are from portraits, as are the two booted figures (38, 39), the togatus (34), and the two Late Roman pieces (54, 55). There is at present no certain indication of any idealized sculpture from this area. Among the large sculptures there is a full range of dates, from early to late Roman times. The subjects found here are worthy of note. Deities represented are Aphrodite, Apollo, Dionysos and two satyrs, Priapus (perhaps as a support for an Aphrodite), and Telesphoros. As with sculptures on the scaenae frons and in the colonnade and those found in the entrances and adjacent courtyards, the concentration of divinities is significant. Notably, the smaller sculptures of Dionysos and satyrs are one-third to one-half life-size and probably would have been set up on bases, though they may have been moved to new locations with the alteration of the Theater to an arena. The statuettes-Aphrodite, Priapus, and Telesphoros-have a less certain context, since their size makes them so mobile. But their presence in the Theater may nonetheless have a particular significance. Why should they be here? Could they have been carried in as part of religious processions during a major festival? Are marble statuettes the next least-costly kind of souvenir after those in terracotta? Is the Theater a place where sellers of such small items would hawk their wares at festival times, as in many modern contexts? STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA STATUARY APPROXIMATELY LIFE-SIZE Heads (27-33) Pls. 43, 44:a Head of an Isthmian official or victor T-388/Sc. 53. Theater, east end of stage in front of east hospitalium, section V7, 1.5 m above orchestra level, 1926. P.H. 0.251, max. W. 0.189, D. 0.183, H. face 0.164, W. face 0.148 m. 27

Twojoining fragments; head broken from back of chin through nape, missing segments of upper and rear crown, large piece missing from the left cheek through center of the chin. Chips missing from wreath, forehead hair, brows, nose, and ears; root marks over left temple; parts of right cheek discolored yellow and brown.

134

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

Bibliography:de Grazia1973, pp. 62-64, no. 2. Marble,white,fine to medium grained,withsome gray veins; probablymicaceous; Pentelic. The figure,whichwearsa pine wreath,has hairclipped short, brushed forwardover the forehead and in different directions on the sides. Overthe left temple, commashaped locks are brusheddown in twoshort, regularrows and awayfrom the face in front of the ears;whereas on the right, pointed, sickle-shapedlocks, sketchy in treatment, are directed towardthe face. The even border of the front locks is emphasized by a thin, chiseled line that curves up into a point above each temple. Above this, a second row displaysmore irregularmovement. The hair adheres closely to the skull,which rounds outwardat the temples. Individualstrandsare worked with a flat chisel held at an angle, and the beveled surfaces give the impressionof volume through the resultingcontrastof light and shadow.The hair is also worn short in back, appearing to stopjust below the level of the bottom of the ear. Rendering of the hair is dry, linear, and, at left, somewhat schematic. Signs of age and worryline the face. On the forehead, two shallow grooves parallel the hairline. The brow is furrowed by two sharp, vertical wrinkles, while lighter scratches indicate crow's feet. The left outer eyebrow hangs down over the end of the eye, giving the impression of sagging. The subject'sage is further indicated by

bags under the eyes that are emphasized by creases and by a diagonal fold of flesh beside the nose, set off by a chiseled furrow. In addition, the prominent cheekbone is contrasted with the sag of flesh beneath it and the gradual swelling of the heavy chin. The thin lips are closed, conveying a resolute expression. The chin, despite the break, can be recognized as square and firm. The modeling is not strongly plastic, but a contrast of light and shadow with linear definition is achieved in some areas. The top, sides, and back of the head display different degrees of finish, showing that the primary view was from three-quarters left and that the statue was probably set against a wall. The needles of the pine wreath are marked by fine striations in front, but not over the right temple. The hair before the right ear is also unfinished, suggesting that it would not have been seen. The right eye is also slightly widened, to correspond with this viewing angle. Holes from a small drill (diam. 0.002 m) mark the centers of the eyes (more deeply at left) and the outer corner of the mouth. The left ear is large, the ear canal moderately hollowed, the helix not undercut. Work over the top and back of the head is sketchy, but there is no indication that the head comes from a high relief. Part of the wreath is missing from the right back of the head, but the break from the fillet that tied it remains. Early Augustan.

This life-size head, depicting a man of middle years, is distinguished by the wreath of pine needles worn high on the crown and by his serious demeanor. The regular organization of facial features and careful modeling emphasize the facial structure and character of the person depicted. The subject is a mature man around 50-60 years of age, in whose portrait may be read an air of calm resignation, simplicity, and solid Republican values. The hair arrangement and the head structure are among the portrait's most instructive features. The head of a togate figure on a grave relief from the Via Statilia in Rome resembles this Corinthian work in its square face, in the hair pattern over the temples, and in the sharp facial lines.1 Schweitzer places this relief in his "Sorex" group, which he dates to the second third of the 1st century B.C. Rich modeling in the cheeks of the Via Statilia head, possibly from the early 50s B.C., is reminiscent of the style prevalent toward the end of the first third of the century. The portrait of C. Norbanus Sorex from Pompeii, now in Naples, which Bonifacio dates to the Late Republican period, has the same hair pattern as the Theater head, but a narrower head structure.2 In contrast to most members of Schweitzer's "Sorex" group, the Corinth head is broader and flatter, with a lower, straighter forehead. In the Theater portrait, the less emotional rendering results from a less mobile surface and less plastic modeling than in most members of the "Sorex" group. It shows an increase of classical influence of the sort displayed by a head in the Boboli gardens in Florence.3 The Florentine head, dated ca. 40-30 B.C. by Schweitzer, has comparable proportions, nose lines, mouth, and cheeks. Its eyes appear somewhat more deeply set, although the battered condition of the Corinth head's brows may be misleading. The fashion of brushing the hair in different directions over the temples is observable on portraits of the socalled Cicero type and on others from the Augustan period.4 Some heads of Agrippa, for in1. Rome, Capitoline Museums, Museo Nuovo 2142: Schweitzer 1948, pp. 80, 85, no. E 11, figs. 110, 114, 120. A somewhat similar head from an Italian tomb relief, of the second half of the 1st century B.C., is in New York: MMA 17.23.133 (Richter 1948, no. 7). Both heads display more modeling than does the Corinth piece. 2. Naples, Museo Nazionale 4991: Schweitzer 1948, pp. 79-

83, no. E 1, figs. 99, 103; Weber 1976-1977, col. 42, fig. 5, Augustan; Bonifacio 1997, pp. 28-31, no. 1, pl. 1. Cf. also a grave relief in the Vatican: Helbig4, I, no. 1139. 3. Schweitzer 1948, pp. 114, 117, no. H 6, figs. 179, 180. 4. Agora I, p. 16; Carpenter 1951, p. 42. Goette (1985) has disassociated this type from its traditional identification. See also Nicgorski 1988.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA

135

stance, have this characteristic, but their usefulness as parallels is limited because many are cop-

ies, some considerably later than the prototype. Hence, the closest comparisons would suggest that the Corinth portrait was made ca. 40-30 B.C. or shortly thereafter. Discussions of Late Republican portraits, however, like that of the so-called Cicero type, may call for a lowering of the

date by 10-20 years, to the EarlyAugustan period.5

The Corinth portrait shows stronger connections with works found in Italy than with Ist-century B.C. portraits in Athens, Delos, or Rhodes, perhaps demonstrating the colonists' strong ties to their homeland and the diminished influence of Hellenistic art in certain areas of mainland

Greece in the second half of the 1st century B.C.6A bronze bust in Naples from the period ofJulius Caesar,for instance, conveys a similar direct impression, though the face is more fluidly treatedand the hairmore finelydetailed.7A more schematiceffect can be seen in the hairof an anonymous marble head in Naples, dated soon after the middle of the 1st century B.C.The overall conception, however,appears closer to the "city-Roman"tradition (if it can be called that) than that of the Corinth piece.8 The distinctive treatment of the Corinth head, however, suggests that its

artistwas Greek, and that in the second half of the 1st century B.C. the Italian tradition exerted a strong influence on artistsin Greece. The latter suggestion is further supported by Ist-century portraits from Athens of this period, in particular National Museum 4453, 353, and 437.9 The analysis of the carving tradition of this piece is complicated by two facts: first, many artists

B.C.

working in Italyat this time were Greek, and second, in this period there is much disagreement as to chronology and the regional associationsof artistsand survivingsculptures. One might not think that controversiesregarding portraitsfrom Delos would be relevant here, but since the Via Statiliarelief has been called "Delian"in character,these problems need to be considered.10The Corinth head owes something to the tradition that produced both the Via Statilia relief and Delos A 2912, but it appears to have been created later, under stronger classicalinfluence." Some formal properties of the Corinth head seem to be a function of the regional workshop that produced it rather than the date. In particular,the dry rendering, linear emphasis, beveled surfaces, and unsmoothed finish have many parallels at Corinth from various dates in the Roman period, and the features may be those of a particularAttic workshop.12 The pine wreath was worn by victors in the games that were celebrated during most of antiquity in the neighboring sanctuaryof Poseidon on the Isthmos.13The presence of the wreath may mark the return of control of the games from Sikyon to Corinth, after the hiatus between the Mummian destruction in 146 B.C.and the founding of the Roman colony in 44 B.C.Gebhard has argued that Corinth had regained control of the Isthmian games by 40 B.C., on the basis of the duoviricoins of that year on which the Isthmian wreath is represented with a hydria, the vessel symbolizingprizes. In her view,the Isthmian games took place at Corinth in the early daysof the colony and did not return to the Isthmian sanctuaryuntil the time of Nero.14 5.Johansen 1971. Cf. also Bonifacio 1997, pp. 29-31. 6. The degree of Italian influence on portraits in Greece from the 1st century B.C. is a controversial point, which has been much discussed. For one view, see Stewart 1979, pp. 6598, with bibliography. On sculptures in Greece, see on Athens, e.g., Datsouli-Stavridi 1985, esp. pls. 1-8; Rhomiopoulou 1997, nos. 4, 5, 7; on Delos, Michalowski in Delos 13; on Rhodes, Laurenzi 1932. Many Asia Minor portraits exhibit strong Hellenistic influence throughout the Roman period; see, e.g., Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, pp. 4, 6, 9, 15; and Rose 1997b. 7. West 1933, p. 70, fig. 61, pl. XV, from Herculaneum. 8. West 1933, p. 69, fig. 60, pl. XV. 9. NM 4453, 353, 437: Datsouli-Stavridi 1985, p. 26, pl. 9; p. 26, pl. 12; p. 27, pl. 14, ca. 43 B.C.; all of Pentelic marble. NM 437 is dated ca. 40 B.C. by Stewart (1979, p. 83), and 43-41 B.C. by Rhomiopoulou (1997, p. 21, no. 7). 10. On the Via Statilia relief as "Delian," see Stewart 1979, pp. 76-77, pl. 18:c, comparing Delos A 2912.

11. In personalconversation(1990), C. de GraziaVanderpool noted thatshe thinksthat thishead is Trajanicon the basisof the outwardcurve of the lower eyelids. The head structureand the shapeand directionof the hairlocks,however,seem to supportthe earlierdating.Moreover,the lowerlids havea continuous curve, rather than the flat shelf seen on some Trajanicheads. 12. See Sturgeon 1989 and Fittschen 1989. 13. See Broneer 1962 and Goette 1984, p. 573, note 4, on pine. Cf. the portraitof an athlete withvictorycrownin Schloss Erbach:Fittschen 1977, p. 20, note 2, no. 6 (Late Flavian to Trajanic).Fora marbleportraitof similardate wreathedin pine, found in the Isthmiatheater,see IsthmiaIV,no. 56. For another Isthmianvictor at Corinth, S-340,see de Grazia1973, pp. 201204, no. 47, where dated to the Tetrarchicperiod. 14. Gebhard 1993. Coin:Amandry1988, type IV,pp. 39-41, pl. V, nos. R 1-5. On the control of the Isthmian games, see Paus.2.2.2. On activityat Corinthduringthe hiatus,see Romano 1994.

136

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

If this portrait represents a victor, his advanced years would suggest that he won the prize in the singing contest that took place in the Corinth Theater and that he celebrated his victory by erecting a portrait there. Roman portraits wearing a pine wreath include the statue of Hadrian

from Cyrene as well as nonimperial subjects.In some portraitsthe wreathindicates victory,but at Corinth it may also indicate an official of the games or a priest. The agonothetesof the Isthmian

games, for example, was an important civic officer who was expected to make a substantialbenefaction to the cityby financing the festival.The statue may commemorate such an official and his benefaction, and it would likely have been approved by the town council.'5 Since the Corinth stage underwent a number of building phases after this sculpture was made, it is uncertain where it was set up originally. It seems evident from its findspot, however, that this

portrait of an official or victor would have occupied a prominent location at the east end of the stage. It may have been moved there when the Theater was adapted to serve as an arena and possibly stood there until Late Roman times.16 This sculpture and those that follow help to counter the supposition that little sculpture was set up in the early days of the colony and that the need for sculpture was satisfied by statuary imported from Italy.17 28

Portrait of a Roman Pls. 44:b, 45, 46 as identified Galba) (formerly T-277/Sc. 17. Theater, found below latest floor of the Roman orchestra, at center, where the altar of Apollo (51) now stands, 1926. P.H. 0.302, p.W. 0.140, D. 0.243, L. face 0.196, W. neck 0.139, D. neck 0.150 m. Three joining fragments; head broken at the base of the neck, large segment missing from the left side. Small chip missing from the right cheek, hair over the central forehead badly abraded, the nose, right ear, and chin are chipped; right side of the face and hair are weathered; discoloration mars some facial surfaces. Bibliography: Shear 1926, pp. 454-455, fig. 8, identified as Galba; Carpenter 1928, p. 80, no. 21; Vermeule 1968, pp. 199-200, fig. 127, LateJulio-Claudian; de G ia 1973, pp. 81-84, no. 8, Tiberian; Fabbricotti 1976, pp. 69-70, no. 5, pl. 11, a private individual, Flavian; Sturgeon 1990, p. 512, pl. 78:1, 2. Marble, white, fine grained; probably micaceous; Pentelic. The face of this fine portrait head forms a long rectangle, somewhat longer in proportion to its width than the replica of the Doryphoros (20). The forehead and

cheekbone meet at a sharp angle. A horizontal depression that curves down in the middle emphasizes the forward-slanting forehead. The flat plane at the back of the neck indicates that the head was frontal. The eyes are asymmetrical: the left long and narrow, the right opened wider. The short upper eyelids are lightly set off, while the lower form a gradual transition to the cheeks. The right eyeball rounds outward considerably, but the left does not. The nose would have been distinctive, large, and possibly aquiline in profile, for it is bony near the base. The cheekbones are set high over light hollows that lead into wide jaws. No lines around the eyes or mouth convey extreme age, but the lined forehead, slight swelling of the brows, solemn demeanor, and thick neck suggest a man of mature years, perhaps around 50 years old. The cheeks are somewhat fleshy around the mouth and nose, as if beginning to sag. The thin lips, pressed together, make the subject appear resolute. The firm chin has a strong cleft in the center, and the solid neck is marked by a thick Adam's apple. Clipped short, the hair adheres closely to the scalp. It is divided over the right temple, while the pattern over the forehead cannot be determined due to wear. Before

15. Hadrian from Cyrene, Temple of Apollo, London, BM 1381: Rosenbaum 1960, no. 34. For anonymous portraits wearing the pine wreath, cf. a head in the Capitoline Museums in Rome, Museo Nuovo 2741, said to come from near Frascati (Gasparri 1989, p. 100, fig. 15, pl. 32; Helbig4, II, no. 1629, dated Hadrianic); and a head in the Vatican Museums (Andreae 1995, no. 605, pls. 204, 205). The identification of the Theater head as a priest is probably unlikely, given the absence of a strophion or rolled diadem; cf. the relief found near the Olympieion in Athens, in the Third Ephoreia (Clinton 1992, p. 139, no. 1, fig. 55, where dated Early Antonine by Harrison); heads in the Athenian Agora, S-333, S-526, and S-659 (Agora I, nos. 3, 29, 49); as well as portraits elsewhere in Athens (NM 349 and 438) and in Eleusis (Agora I, pp. 61, note 2, 64, 97-98, 100, pl. 46:d, e). On headgear worn by priests, see Rumscheid 2000. On portraits of benefactors in theaters, see Fuchs 1987, pp. 162-163; these include depictions of benefactors or restorers of theaters as well as persons who paid for other buildings

in the city. On the agonothesia, see Geagan 1968, p. 70. Kent's index (Corinth VIII, iii, p. 250) lists a number of examples of the abbreviation d.d. for decurionum decreto,some of which occur on statue bases. See CorinthVIII, iii, no. 130, and no. 152, a monument to Sextus Olius Secundus, son of Lucius, of the Aemilian tribe, priest of Jupiter Capitolinus and president of the games, probably during the Augustan period. It is probably this sort of person, honored for his sponsorship of the games and possibly of other projects, whose portrait was set up in the Theater. 16. On the chronological phases of the Early Roman theater, see above, p. 4; Stillwell in CorinthII, pp. 41-42, 52, 135136; Williams and Zervos 1985, pp. 68-79; and 1986, pp. 159161. 17. For the view that Early Roman sculptures may have been brought to Corinth by the colonists, see Ridgway 1981b, p. 430; Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, p. 121. De Grazia (1973, p. 14) expresses the opposite opinion.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA

the right ear, strandsare lightly chiseled, but with minimal detail. Behind the survivingear and over the crown, the surface is more sketchilyworkedwith a round-ended chisel, as if the back would not have been seen. Workis even less detailed on top, where tooth-chisel marks remain. In contrast to the superficial finish over much of the hair, the smoothing behind the ear lobe is very careful. Raspingremains on the back of the neck right of the dowel cutting. No draperyis carved on the neck. The lower neck is sliced verticallyat the rearwhere a cutting for a rectangulardowel (p.L. 0.090, W. 0.028 m),

137

which adjoins the rear surface, shows the means of attaching the head to a herm shaft. No trace of metal survives in the cutting. The separate carvingof herm heads may have been regularpractice at Corinth, but the practice appears to contrastwith that at Athens, where herm heads and shafts are typically worked from a single block.18Making a herm head separatelywould allow a herm shaft to be made of less expensive or reused stone, and use of a dowel might hinder breakageduring earthquakes. Tiberian.

This is an impressive male portrait head of the 1st century A.C. On its discovery, Shear advanced a Flavian date and identified it as the short-ruling Galba (A.D. 68-69). Fabbricotti doubted the identification and she considered the head to represent a private individual, but also of the Flavian era. Vermeule, though presenting the head under the heading of Galba, cast some doubt on this attribution and argued on the basis of numismatic parallels for a Late Julio-Claudian date, as did Shear and Fabbricotti for a Flavian one. The Corinth portrait differs from depictions of Galba both in the round and on coins in a number of ways, most notably in head structure, depth of eyes, and degree of plasticity. The most important differences in the Corinth head, however, are the age and head structure. The subject is much younger than most portraits identified as Galba, who was seventy-one when he became emperor.19 Some Flavian sculptures, such as the nonimperial portrait Athens, NM 431, may appear to bear a "familial" resemblance,20 but the Corinth head is narrower. Less mass is concentrated over the eyes, and the features are more evenly distributed over the face. In short, it presents a more classical appearance. Portraits of Augustus offer general analogies with regard to the shape of the face, forehead, cheeks, and chin, and to some extent, the treatment of the straight brows, eyes, and mouth. This resemblance can be illustrated by a head of the "Octavian" type from Rome, now in New York.21

On the other hand, portraits of the young Tiberius that are dated to the Late Augustan period present more comparable features. The Capitoline bust no. 283, in general, and the Munich head Residenz no. 13, more specifically, exhibit short hair rendered in a similar caplike, closefitting manner, with the forking over the right temple and a similar pattern and flatness in the hair beside it.22The lank, smoothed rendering of the temple hair on the Corinth head is particularly close to that of the Munich piece. Despite the sketchy treatment of the back of the Corinth head, the area behind the ear lobe is carefully smoothed, an aspect also of the Capitoline bust no. 283 and the head of Tiberius from the Fayum in Copenhagen; it is a feature that seems less prominent in later portraits of Tiberius.23 The long, thin upper lip with its pronounced central dip corresponds to the compressed mouth of the Florence statue of Tiberius.24The wide, rectangular forehead with its firm swellings, the sharp, straight ridges of the eyebrows, and the moderate-sized eyes with their distinct, but softly rendered lids also find correspondences in some later 18. For separately carved herm shafts at Corinth, see 1-751 (Corinth VIII, i, no. 14), found near the Gymnasium, and two found in excavations by the University of Texas in that area, 1-70-39 and 1-71-15, where large, rectangular dowels are used as in 28. The herm of Herodes Atticus (S-1219) is in one piece (Corinth IX, p. 88, no. 169); so also Agora I, no. 25, and the kosmetes(Rhomiopoulou 1997, nos. 39-51, 53-65). For head attachments using marble tenons, cf. AgoraI, nos. 4, 7; Claridge 1990, pp. 142-145; and Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 52 (Athens, NM 405). 19. On identification and date, see Fabbricotti 1976, pp. 6970; Heintze 1968b. 20. Datsouli-Stavridi 1985, pl. 34. 21. MMA 08.258.47: Richter 1948, no. 17; Vierneisel and Zanker 1979, no. 5.1; Breckenridge 1982, p. 484, pl. 1.

22. Rome, Capitoline Museums, Stanza degli Imperatori 3, inv. 283: Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 10, pls. 11-12. Munich, Residenz, no. 13: Curtius 1935, p. 305, figs. 24, 25; Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 10, replica 8. 23. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 623 (inv. 1445): Johansen 1994-1995, I, no. 45; Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 10, replica 1 (Late Augustan); Poulsen 1962, p. 82, no. 45, pls. 76, 77; Polacco 1955, pp. 118-119, pls. 13,14. Cf. also a head of Tiberius in a private collection: Jucker and Willers 1982, pp. 76-77, no. 28, A.D. 4-14. 24. Uffizi 1914.102: Polacco 1955, pp. 128, 130, 131, 146, pl. 21; Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 12 (Tiberian), p. 14, note 9, where analogy to the later portrait of Tiberius, Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 624 (inv. 1750), is pointed out; see alsoJohansen 1994-1995, I, no. 47.

138

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

heads of Tiberius.25The lower face, however, is too broad for the piece to be identified as Tiberius himself. A number of features of the Corinth head find other associations with portraits from the Tiberian period (A.D. 14-37). Heads of Drusus Major, such as Capitoline 355 of Tiberian to Claudian date, have somewhat similar temple locks, sharpness of eyebrows, eye shapes, mouth width, thinness and projection of the upper lip, and chin.26 On the heads of Drusus, the corners of the mouth recede into lightly modeled cheeks in a corresponding manner. The pattern of forehead hairs and the more salient bone structure in the Corinth portrait, however, are closer to portraits of Tiberius's first type than to those of Drusus Major. In addition, in contrast to portraits of the Claudian period, the Corinth piece lacks the melancholy expression, wider eyes, thicker proportions, and plasticity that are increasingly noticeable in these later works. Witness, for example, portraits of Caligula and Claudius in Copenhagen27 or depictions of Augustus dated to the Claudian period, such as those in Boston, Naples, and Samos.28 The Corinth head shows none of the influences from Hellenistic ruler portraits that these pieces, in different ways, display. Since earlier portraits of Augustus also show some general resemblance to the Corinth sculpture, it may be their influence, modified by early portraits of Tiberius, to which the Corinth sculptor was most subject. Portraits of nonimperial subjects in this period, especially from mainland Greece, present problems of analysis, and their interpretation is often even more controversial than that of the Julio-Claudian princes. It is difficult to tell the degree to which such portraits were influenced by imperial portrait types and whether the influence was direct or indirect, that is, from second- or third-hand replicas. The short hair length on the back of the Corinth head, for instance, could result from a date earlier in the Julio-Claudian period; it could reflect conservative, local hairstyles; or it could, more simply, be a product of the sketchy treatment of this area. Perhaps it was considered inappropriate as well as unconventional for private citizens to wear the longer coiffure, with the result that these individuals followed the more conservative Late Republican tradition with regard to hair length. The fashion might also signal the subject's status as a freedman. The Tiberian portrait from Italy (near Nemi) of L. Aninius Rufus, for instance, wears similar short-cropped hair in back.29 Furthermore, the Corinth piece does not betray the influence of Late Hellenistic Greek portraits of the sort found inJulio-Claudian portraits from Asia Minor, like those in Kos, Rhodes, or Samos.30 The manner of rendering, however, especially the relative dryness, the lack of sharp detailing, and the somber, idealizing tone, distance it from "city-Roman"works, suggesting that it may be the product of a regional workshop. Comparisons with an anonymous head in the Athenian Agora, dated between 10 B.C. and A.D. 20, and with portraits of Tiberius of the first type from Samos, Troy, and Alexandria emphasize the specific character of the Corinth piece and confirm a date in the Late Augustan to Early Tiberian period.31 This portrait was found directly under the center of the latest floor of the Roman orchestra, where it was used as packing material during a late repaving of the orchestra. The portrait lay above the sand floor of the arena and under the marble paving of the post-arena period in a 25. CapitolineMuseums,PalazzoBraschi416: Fittschenand Zanker1985, no. 12, pls. 13, 14, a variantof the Berlin/Naples/ Sorrento type. The Braschi and Florence heads, related to Copenhagen Ny CarlsbergGlyptotek624 (inv. 1750), appear to have the thicker and wider proportions of the Late Tiberian period. Berlin: Fittschen and Zanker 1985, pp. 13-14, cat. 12, no. 3. Naples, Museo Nazionale 6043: Polacco 1955, pp. 130131, pl. 26:2. Sorrento:Fittschen and Zanker 1985, pp. 13-14, cat. 12, no. 5, Appendix, pl. 14:a-b (the type post-A.D.4). 26. Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 22, pl. 24. 27. Copenhagen: Poulsen 1962, nos. 54, 56-59; Johansen 1994-1995, I, nos. 56, 58-61. 28. Vierneisel and Zanker 1979, nos. 6.3, 6.4, 6.7. Boston,

MFA 99.344, from Ariccia: Vierneisel and Zanker 1979, p. 69, fig. 6:3. Naples, from Fondi: Zanker 1973, pls. 22-24. Samos, Tigani no. 45: Agora I, pl. 43:g. 29. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 1437: Poulsen 1962, no. 82, pls. 146, 147;Johansen 1994-1995, I, no. 84. 30. Cf. Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, pp. 4, 6, 11. 31. Athens: Agora I, no. 7. Samos, Vathy: Fabbrini 1964, p. 304, figs. 1, 2. Troy, Berlin, Staatliche Museen 9587: Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 10, replica 22; Polacco 1955, pl. 15:2; Bonacasa 1964, p. 178, fig. 13. Alexandria, Greek and Roman Museum 22237: Bonacasa 1962, pp. 171-173, figs. 1-3; Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 10, replica 2;Jucker 1982, p. 686, note 68, fig. 15:a, b.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA

139

mixed fill that included Late Roman pottery.32Since packing materialwasverylikely sought from nearby, it seems probable that the figure once decorated the EarlyRoman theater and continued to be displayed until sometime in the 3rd century A.C. The Theater portrait may present a somewhat cold appearance initially,but this impression is alleviated by the soft rendering of the eyes, the subtle play of modeling around the nose and mouth, and the strength and resoluteness in the chin. The sharp horizontal lines of the eyebrows and mouth give the figure a strong, deliberate attitude. A sense of responsible concern, perhaps both civic and religious, is conveyed through the suggestion of restrained energy in the forehead. The head may represent a civic official who was a member of a prominent Corinthian family,such as the Caninii, Rutilli, or Bassi,who are known to have set up dedications in the city in the early decades of the 1st century A.C.33Given that the Theater was rebuilt in Late Augustan to EarlyTiberian times, this portrait may have been set up in association with the new structure, perhaps to honor a major benefactor.34 P1. 47:a Fragmentary male head S-3706. From marble pile in Old Museum courtyard from the early excavations, possibly from the Theater, 1926. P.H. 0.138, p.W. 0.118, Th. 0.094 m. Single fragment from forehead and crown of head. Surface badly worn, abraded, weathered, and partly calcined from exposure to fire. Marble, white, fine to medium grained; possibly micaceous. A fragmentary male portrait head, about life-size, with 29

low forehead and sharp curve to the crown survives. The hair is brushed forward in two rows of long, commashaped locks that curve to proper left over the forehead, to proper right over the crown. The loosely waving locks, which adhere closely to the head, achieve a minimal plasticity through beveled surfaces. A chisel edge defined curl borders and secondary strands, especially where they lie flat. The corner of the left eye is preserved, and its position suggests that the forehead is low. Early Imperial.

Despite the fragmentary nature of this piece, the style and treatment of the hair are sufficiently distinctive to indicate an EarlyImperial date. Good parallels are provided by portraitsof Augustus of Prima Porta type, in which the hair has similar loose waves and length of locks, as well as two rows of locks in opposite directions.35 The shapes of the locks and the sharp chiseling

of them can be seen, for instance, in the hair brushed back over the left temple on the Augustus in the Uffizi.36Since general analogies can also be drawnto heads from later in theJulio-Claudian period, such as the Copenhagen portraits from the Neronian period of Germanicus and of a young boy, it may not be possible to date the Corinth fragment more exactly.37Trajanichairstyles and rendering, on the other hand, seem considerably stiffer and more linear than that of the Corinth piece, lending support for an Early Imperial date. P1.47:b, c 30 Fragmentarymale head S-3318. Found in Shear'sexcavations,probablyfrom the Theater, 1926. P.H. 0.254, p.W. 0.188, p.Th. 0.094 m. Single fragment;broken verticallythrough center of head just behind the ears and through the base of the neck. Surfacesbadly worn.

Bibliography:de Grazia 1973, pp. 131-132, no. 20, where dated 1st century A.C., possiblyFlavian. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; probably Pentelic. The back of a somewhatover life-sizemale head wearing a laurel wreath is preserved. The wreath is tied by a broad ribbon, the ends of which hang down the central

32. Shear 1926, p. 455; Stillwell 1929, pp. 86-87, and in CorinthII, pp. 8, note 5, 41, 43-44. 33. Cf. CorinthVIII, iii, nos. 130, 131, concerning Q. Granius Bassus,procuratorof Augustus,benefactorof a bath. Cn. Babbius Philinus, aedileand pontifex,is another majordonor,well known for the round monument at the west end of the Forum:Corinth ii, VIII,iii, no. 155; CorinthI,iii, pp. 21-22, pl. 10:1;CorinthVIII, no. 132 (notably the same dedication appears on the epistyle and on revetment for the podium). For other inscriptions of ii, nos. 2, 3, 98-101, 131; CorinthVIII, Babbius,see CorinthVIII, iii, no. 241. His name appears more frequently in inscriptions at Corinth than anyone else's, including on four architectural fragments (CorinthVIII,ii, nos. 99, 100, 131, 132). Since he was a priest, however, he would probably have been represented

as such, which may exclude him from consideration here. 34. CorinthII, p. 135. See also Williamsand Zervos1988, pp. 108-112. Williamsand K. Slane are developing a chronology for the early phases of the Theater. On the inscriptions from the Theater,see above, pp. 45-49, and the Appendix. 35. Cf. the Vaticanstatue from PrimaPorta:West 1933, no. 111; Zanker1973, pp. 9, 44-45, pl. 33:a;Helbig4,I, no. 411. 36. Florence,Uffizi1914.78:Zanker1973,pp. 14-15, pls. 4-5. 37. Poulsen 1962, nos. 53 (although the second rowof locks moves in the same direction as the first), 64 (although on the Copenhagen head the locks are more even, have less movement, and are shorter); Johansen 1994-1995, I, nos. 54, 66. See also Todisco 1985.

140

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

back, the right edge angled toward the front. Probably little of the ribbon would have been visible from the front, although on many wreathed heads, the ribbons hang on either side of the neck.38 The hair is worn short and lies close to the head in sickle- and S-shaped locks that curl in alternate directions. The locks are lightly chiseled in low relief. The drill is used emphatically on the left side of wreath and ribbon, but not on the right, so the left side would have been seen, the head turned to proper right. The hair, which does not extend very far down the neck, is corre-

spondingly rendered with more volume and detail at lower left, confirming that the head was seen from a three-quarterleft viewpoint. The hair increases in volume toward the front where the locks are brushed toward the forehead. Light rasping remains on the neck. Despite its worn condition, it can be seen that the hair is consistently finished over the upper crown and back, which may indicate that the portraitwas erected in a location free from an architecturalbackground. Flavian(?).

De Grazia identified the wreath as oak, but the leaves are straight-sided with central spines and therefore represent laurel.39The narrow, bladelike leaves are grouped in threes, parallel to each other, like the wreaths that Cassimatis identifies as of pikrodaphne(spurge laurel), common in the Hellenistic period on many figures on Cyprus.40A laurel wreath might indicate that the subject is an emperor, a priest of Apollo, or a Delphic victor.41 The scale may suggest that the subject is important. The hairstyle could be Julio-Claudian or Flavian, but the rendering suggests the latter.42Some portraits of Domitian are shown with Sshaped locks of similar plasticity and waviness, although the Corinth head is more detailed in back than many heads of comparable scale and date. As de Grazia has pointed out, this piece is similar to the portrait of Domitian at Corinth.43 31

P1. 47:d-f Helmeted head S-3319. Found in Shear's excavations, probably from the Theater. P.H. 0.185, p.W. 0.179, p.Th. 0.083 m. Single fragment; broken through tops of eyes and central crown. Front edge of helmet and curls chipped, upper surface weathered, some encrustation. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. The forehead and crown from a helmeted figure approximately life-size. The left eye is deeply set under a swelling brow, and the eyebrow hairs are not carved. The upper eyelid, cleanly chiseled out above and below, curves down sharply near the inner corner. The rectangular forehead is marked by two deep, horizontal creases and

framed by curly hair emanating from beneath the helmet brim. A single narrow lock curls toward the right on each side of the forehead, framing three curls preserved primarily in outline. The surviving locks are crisply carved and outlined by smoothed drill channels. The headgear resembles a metal helmet with visor set back ca. 0.04 m from the upward curving brim. The visor (W. 0.023-0.034 m) has a tubular edge in front and a low ridge in back. There is no sign of a crest. The figure's skin is smoothly finished, but the surface of the helmet has a rough, metallic appearance, especially behind the visor. Mid-Hadrianic.

Comparisons with portraits indicate a mid-Hadrianic date. The hairstyle, forehead shape, and eye rendering of this sculpture are close to portraits of Hadrian of the "Stazioni Termini" type, 38. Claudius, for instance, is frequently depicted wearing an oak wreath; see examples in Athens (NM 430: DatsouliStavridi 1985, pp. 34-35, pls. 25-26; Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 29); Olympia (OlympiaIII, pp. 232-235, pl. 60:6;Niemeyer 1968, no. 96); the Vatican (Niemeyer 1968, no. 95; Helbig4,I, no. 45); Copenhagen (Poulsen 1962, no. 58, pls. 96, 97;Johansen 1994-1995, I, no. 60); and Leptis Magna (Niemeyer 1968, no. 90). Also wreathedin oak are Vespasian(Poulsen 1974, no. 2, pls. 3, 4;Johansen 1994-1995, II, no. 2); Domitian (Rome, Museo Nazionale 115191: Daltrop, Hausmann, and Wegner 1966, pl. 30; Felletti Maj1953, no. 150); and Titus (OlympiaIII, pl. 61:2). 39. De Grazia1973, pp. 131-132. 40. Cassimatis1982. On laurel, see Connelly 1988, pp. 3-5. 41. RE IV, cols. 1636-1643, s.v. corona(Haebler); EAAII, pp. 861-866, s.v. corona(Breglia); DarSagI, 2, pp. 1520-1537. Comparethe Athenianportraitthatwearsa laurelwreath(S-347): AgoraI, no. 17. On victorycrowns,see note 38 above. For other examples of laurel wreaths,cf. the head of Hadrian in Cyrene

(Rosenbaum 1960, p. 52, no. 36); Hadrianfrom Hierapytnain Istanbul,ArchaeologicalMuseum585 (Wegner1956, p. 98, pls. 13:a, 15:c); Hadrian from Carthage in Paris, Louvre 1187 (Wegner 1956, pl. 13:b). 42. Comparethe hairof Claudius,Athens,NM430 (DatsouliStavridi1985, pl. 26), and Domitian,Athens, NM 345 (Rhomiopoulou 1997, p. 32, no. 19; Datsouli-Stavridi1985, pp. 37-38, pls. 32, 33; Daltrop, Hausmann,and Wegner 1966, pl. 32:c, d), although at the nape of NM 345 the locks lie in two separate rows.The hair is also somewhatsimilarto that of the Domitian at Corinth,S-2272(de Grazia1973,pp. 122-127, no. 15;Ridgway 1981b, p. 434), but curlier and more plastic than on the back of that head. Compare also the forehead hair of two private portraits in Ostia: OstiaV, nos. 70, a woman, dated FlavianTrajanic,and 71, a male figure in relief. 43. CorinthS-2272:de Grazia1973, no. 15;and see Daltrop, Hausmann, and Wegner 1966, pls. 23:b, 28:a, b (VaticanMuseums, Braccio Nuovo 126), 24:a, b (Ostia 19).

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA

141

dated to the Early Hadrianic period.44 Some nonimperial portraits of Hadrianic date, such as a

boy from Tralles,a bearded head on Thera, and a funerary bust in Cyrene, exhibit comparable locks trailing onto the forehead.45A few of Antinous's portraits have one or two isolated curls with a tight circle at the end, but in most versions his forehead hair is thicker and more cohesive, suggesting a date for the Corinth head somewhat before A.D. 130.46A bust of Early Hadrianic

date from Phlius is similar in the arrangement of locks twistingdown onto the forehead and in the use of drill and chisel to separate, undercut, and articulate them. The Phlius bust, however,

because it is made of hard Thasian marble, shows a much sharper separation of the locks from

the forehead.47

The helmeted head also compares well with Hadrianic heads from Corinth. The way the hair emerges from under the head covering recalls the Hadrianic head of Perseus on which thick, curly locks similarly project from under a cap.48 On the Perseus, however, the locks are thicker and more like those of Antinous, and the drill is applied more heavily for undercutting than

here. Closer analogy to this Theater sculpture is seen in the Monteverde head (19), especially in the finely pointed ends of S-shaped locks escaping onto the forehead. The Monteverde head could possibly be considered Early Hadrianic, as it is similar to posthumous portraits of Trajan.49 A mid-Hadrianic date, on the other hand, is suggested by the rendering of the upper eyelid, which lacks the long, deep, sharp profiles characteristic of some Attic heads from the Late Trajanic

to EarlyHadrianic period.50

The heavy creases of the forehead, the deep-set eyes, and the somewhat wispy hair suggest a

subject of mature years, whereas the helmet could be an attribute of a mythological warrior,a general, or the god Ares/Mars. Consideration of certain depictions of these figures, however, does not readily indicate the subject. Distinctive features here are the visor's location, set back from the brim, and the brim's gradual curve. A crest, if one existed, would have emerged far back on the crown. Cap helmets worn by two portraits from the Villa of the Papyri, now in Naples, are somewhat similar, but their brims turn upward more sharply than that of the Corinth helmet.51'Visor position and brim are similar, rather, to some Hellenistic helmets of pseudo-Corinthian and pseudo-Attic type. The pseudo-Corinthian type occurs at Pergamon on a decorative frieze with weapons, and it is worn by the opponents of Artemis and "Nyx"in the Gigantomachy frieze from the Great Altar; a similar helmet of pseudo-Attic type is known through a bronze helmet

from Romania.52On the Corinth sculpture, the "brim"may be too long to correspond exactly to the frontlet or lower portion of the visor of a pseudo-Attichelmet, but in its fragmentarystate it could represent a variant of either the pseudo-Corinthian or pseudo-Attic type. In either case, it appears to represent a helmet of Greek rather than Roman type.53 44. Rome, ConservatoriMuseums817:Fittschenand Zanker 1985, pp. 44-46, no. 46, pls. 49-51. Rome, Museo Nazionale 124491:Wegner1956, pp. 8-10, pls. 2,5:b; Fittschenand Zanker 1985, no. 46, replica 4, Appendix, pl. 23:a-d. Also a head in Miletos:Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, no. 32, pl. 18:3, 4. 45. Tralles:Blimel 1933, no. R 51, pl. 48; cf. also Berlin, StaatlicheMuseen 411 (Bliimel 1933, no. R 68). Thera:Wegner 1956, pl. 31:a, b, though not Hadrian (see Fittschen 1992, esp. pl. 9:1). Cyrene: Rosenbaum 1960, no. 237, pl. 89:4. Cf. also the head of Hadrian in Cologne, Romisch-GermanischesMuseum 49.6: Bracker1968, p. 80, dated A.D. 132/3. 46. Athens, NM 418: Meyer 1991, no. I 8, pl. 6. 47. Athens, NM 420: Datsouli-Stavridi1985, p. 49, pl. 47; West1941,fig. 87, pl. 24; Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 72 (autopsy). A private portrait from near the Olympieion in Athens (NM 249) exhibitsa more broken-uprenderingof the locks,although their general arrangement is similar (autopsy); see Wegner 1956, pp. 40, 62, pl. 26:b;Datsouli-Stavridi1985, pp. 44-45, pl. 42; Harrison, in AgoraI, p. 39, EarlyAntonine; and Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 80, ca. A.D. 130.

48. S-72-4:Sturgeon 1975, pp. 283-284. 49. See 19, with bibliography,esp. Trillmich1981, pp. 288289, pl. 39. 50. Cf.Athens, NM 3085, 3086,3087: Datsouli-Stavridi1985, pp. 52-56, pls. 56, 59-61; Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 67. 51. The curvesare evident in unrestored areasof the brims. The Villa of the Papyri "Pyrrhus"(Smith 1988a, no. 5, pl. 6) and "Krateros"(Smith 1988a, no. 7, pl. 8) are the only fullscale replicas illustratedwith helmets in Smith 1988a. 52. Attic Hellenistic helmet type minus crest:AntikeHelme, pp. 169-180, esp. 171, figs. 51, 53, 54. Pseudo-Corinthianhelmet type:Dintsis 1986, pp. 97-104, no. 181, pl. 40:4,Appendix, no. 266, pl. 7. Helmet on Pergamon "Ranken"frieze:AvPVII, ii, no. 396, Appendix, pl. 40. Pergamon altar,where the influence of the Boiotian helmet is noted: Dintsis 1986, no. 183, pl. 41:4, 5, Appendix, no. 272, pl. 7; AvP III, ii, p. 43, pl. 28; Kahler1948, pls. 30,55. Pseudo-Attichelmet type:Dintsis 1986, pp. 113-133, no. 222, pl. 56:6, Appendix, no. 347, pl. 9, first half of 3rd century B.C.

53. See Robinson1975,pp. 11-143,on typesof Romanhelmets.

142

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

The creases of the forehead, moreover, suggest that the subject is a portrait. Although Mars's forehead is sometimes creased, as in a figure so identified on the Arch of Trajan at Beneventum, it has a single, less obtrusive crease, not the double, heavier lines of the Theater head.54 A number of Hadrian's portraits, on the other hand, display a heavier double crease, like the helmeted portrait in the Vatican Magazzino that shows certain similarities to the Corinth head.55 But the identification of many heads like this is difficult and often dependent on attributes.56 Helmets do not form common headgear for Roman imperial or nonimperial portraits, possibly because the coiffure is a more common and important individualizing feature. A few examples exist, however, primarily from the 2nd century A.C.,following in the tradition of Alexander the Great and frequently in association with depictions of Ares/Mars or Diomedes.57 For example, Hadrian is helmeted when shown in the guise of Mars in "Ares Borghese" format, wearing the pseudo-Attic helmet of Dintsis's type 2, as in the Vienna piece.58 On the Vienna statue, Hadrian's curly hair also projects from under the helmet, though without trailing strands. Some nonimperial portraits from the mid- to Late Hadrianic period, such as the imago clipeatus in Dresden, are also helmeted,59 and a helmeted portrait discovered in the Carthage odeion presents a successful military man likened to Diomedes.60 The Corinth helmeted head, therefore, could represent a "private"portrait of the mid-Hadrianic period influenced by Hadrian's portraits, but with a freer disposition of forehead locks, as seen in nonimperial portraits of the era. In this context it seems significant that on battle sarcophagi Romans generally wear helmets, in contrast to their barbarian opponents.61 Furthermore, some helmets worn by Greeks on Attic Amazonomachy sarcophagi have long brims.62A helmet could be worn to symbolize the subject's military virtus, much in the way helmets are depicted on certain 2nd-century funerary reliefs.63 The individual presented here could have been a major patron of the Theater who had distinguished himself in warfare.64 32

Female head P1. 48:a-c S-3317. Found in Shear's excavations, probably from the Theater, 1926. P.H. 0.142, W. 0.187, D. 0.212 m. Single piece; head missing the crown and lower third of the face, from the base of the nose and ears, and broken diagonally from top of forehead to nape of the neck and from base of nose and lower cheeks to above the nape. Chips missing from brows, eyes, and nose; worn. Bibliography: de Grazia 1973, pp. 176-178, no. 36, where dated to the period of Severus Alexander (A.D. 222-235).

Marble, white, fine to medium grained; micaceous; Pentelic. This is the portrait head of an older woman, approximately life-size. The wide face is characterized by large eyes and full cheeks with large bones and slight hollows. The rounded forehead is marked by horizontal and vertical depressions. Eyebrow hairs are lightly incised; the large, widely spaced eyes are not deeply set. The upper eyelids project slightly and are set off by strongly chiseled lines. The wide, fleshy lower lid is separated from the cheeks by a depression. The inner corers have downward-pointing, triangular projections and are not drilled.

54. LIMCII,p. 537, no. 287, s.v.Ares/Mars(Simon). 55. Fittschen and Zanker 1985, nos. 47-52; Kaschnitzvon Weinberg 1936-1937, no. 685, pl. 108. 56. For helmeted heads, see, e.g., the shield-bust relief of Ares, Aquileia, Archaeological Museum 351 (LIMCII,p. 522, no. 140, s.v.Ares/Mars[Simon], Late Antonine; Scrinari1972, no. 608), and the relief bust on a rectangularpanel from Petra (LIMCII, p. 493, no. 1, s.v. Aresin per or. [Auge], Augustan; Lyttelton and Blagg 1990, p. 98, fig. 6:9). 57. See Kraft1951; Schafer 1979, p. 365, note 46; Fittschen 1977, no. 13, and p. 43, note 12, for 10 examples of Roman helmeted portraitsin addition to the Erbachhead. 58. Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum I 1028: LIMCII, no. 21b, s.v.Ares/Mars(Simon). Rome, Capitoline Mu514, p. seums 634, the head in the type of the "VatikanChiaramonti 392": Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 48; Hartswick 1990, pp. 246-250, on the helmet shape. 59. Winkes 1969, pp. 158-159, Dresden 1, pl. 2:a,b. It is not possible to determine whether the Theater head comes from a full statue or a shield relief. The imagoclipeatusform is used at

Corinth, for two 2nd-centuryA.C. shield reliefs that contained portraits (S-324, S-687), the heads now missing, were discovered there: Johnson in CorinthIX, pp. 90-91, nos. 174, 175; Winkes 1969, pp. 176-177, pl. 3:b, c. 60. In Tunis: West 1941, fig. 124, pl. 33; Niemeyer 1968, pl. 37:1. 61. Cf. Koch and Sichtermann 1982, pp. 90-92, figs. 73-75; 405, fig. 443. p. 62. Koch and Sichtermann 1982, figs. 420, 421. 63. Cf. the Antonine grave relief from Loukou, Athens, NM 1450:Svoronos1908, p. 452, pl. 75; Karouzou1969, p. 264, pl. 85; Schafer 1979, p. 364, fig. 10. 64. For men prominent in Corinth at this time, see Corinth VIII,iii, no. 137, a statue base from the Forum for G. Cerialis, of Hadrianin Achaia and in charge of the new impeprocurator rial marblequarriesat Karystos;and nos. 138-143, monuments to Cn. CorneliusPulcher,a key patron of Corinth, in charge of the festivalsthe Trajaneaand Isthmia;see also CorinthVIII,iii, p. 96, for others active in Hadrianic Corinth.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA The irises, incised as three-fourths of a circle, are tangent to the upper lids. The pupils are carved out as two vertical drill runnels connected at the bottom. The outlines of the nose suggest that it was short and pudgy, the nostrils strongly set off. Irregular rasping on the cheeks gives a weathered impression. The right ear is drilled out for a length of 0.012 m, the left with only one hole (diam. 0.003 m), which corresponds with less detail elsewhere on the left side of the head. Broad modeling and coarse rasping heighten a careworn appearance. The coiffure is a thick mass that is pulled toward the back, presumably from a central part, covering the tops

143

of the ears. A sketchy pair of S-shapedstrands escapes over the temples and there are more indefinite, thicker wispsbefore the ears. The hair'ssurface is workedwith a flat chisel, whose edge created undulating patterns that are sharper at the front right. The right, therefore, was probably the major viewing side, with the head turned proper left. Not enough of the hair survivesto indicate the coiffure,but the hairmayhave formed a coil of braids at the nape in the manner of Julia Mamaea (A.D. 222235) and Orbiana.65 Ca. A.D. 215-235.

In spite of its incomplete state of preservation, the Corinth head conveys a careworn, slightly anxious expression comparable to that found on other heads of the first half of the 3rd century A.C. from elsewhere. The head structure and hair of this portrait resemble those of several old women in Rome from the mid-3rd century A.C., whose dates are established by the likeness of one of them, Herennia Etruscilla, on coins of A.D. 249-251.66 The head of an old woman on a sarcophagus in Berlin from the 240s, whose heads have been used for the reliable dating of the coiffure, resembles that of Tranquillina.67 Although large eyes, sharply outlined eyelids, and rasped skin surfaces are characteristic of mid-3rd century A.C. portraits, the irregular rasping of our head is distinct from the longer, more regular rasp strokes on two heads in the Athenian Agora dated ca. A.D. 245-255 and 250-260.68 The shorter cross-rasping seen here recalls the technique on a portrait in the Athenian Agora dated ca. A.D. 215-225.69 The simple tooling of the hair may reflect the status of the subject or the limitations of the local workshop, for it contrasts with more detailed carving seen in Athens in this period. P1. 48:d-f Fragmentary male head S-3320. From Shear's excavations. Pencil markings "AP. 19 VI." may indicate "April 19, 192-. Theater cavea VI," or "cavea V section one," or "1.0 m above orchestra level." Probably 1926 or 1929. P.H. 0.130, p.W. 0.112, p.Th. 0.069 m. Single fragment; head broken horizontally above forehead, vertically through left eye, through base of nose to temple, and split vertically in back. Missing chips from hair, forehead, and nose; surface of right brow and eye abraded; surface has some root marks. Marble, white, fine grained; heavily micaceous; Pentelic. Bibliography: de Grazia 1973, pp. 184-185, no. 39, dated second quarter of 3rd century A.c. Small segment from a fine portrait of an older man, somewhat over life-size. The receding hairline, as indicated by the breaks, curved up to form a high triangle over the right eye. From the apex, the tips of several thin 33

locks emerge in low relief. Emphatic changes of plane divide the face into clear geometric sections. The relatively flat forehead contains two shallow creases and two shallow grooves between the brows. Horizontal undercutting and a low bulge at the inner corner mark the eyebrow. The closely set eyes appear large for what was probably a long, narrow face. The upper lids are relatively wide, rounded, and set off by deep creases, but the lower lids, which are thinner and much deeper, are separated from the cheeks by strong grooves. The incised iris emerges from the upper lid as a three-quarter circle, the pupil is pierced in the shape of a thick crescent, while the inner corners are cut by a small drill. A deep diagonal furrow beside the nose is set off from the flat cheek by a sharply beveled plane, but other lines, such as crow's feet, are absent. Faint rasp marks remain on the temple, but other surfaces have been given a highly smoothed, reflective finish. 4th century A.c.

This portraitof an older man is characterizedby an otherworldlyappearance, an upwardlook, and flattened, sharplyjuxtaposed facial planes. De Grazia has dated this piece to the second quarter of the 3rd century A.C., the era of Gordianus Pius (A.D. 238-244), based on comparisons 65. For examples of Orbiana Augusta and Mamaea, see Felletti Maj 1958, pp. 26,103-104, pls. VI:16,17, VII:21-24. Cf. also Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, nos. 164-165; Fittschen and Zanker 1983, nos. 33-35 (A.D. 222-235), and 154, 158 (mid- to Late Severan); and Wood 1986, pp. 59-60, 64-65, 74-75. 66. Fittschen and Zanker 1983, nos. 164-166, dated postSeveran or mid-3rd century A.C. Cf. also two female portraits in Rome, Museo Nazionale 136 and 56351 (Felletti Maj 1953, nos. 309,310), mid-3rd century A.C.,and Athens, NM 2138 (Datsouli-

Stavridi1985, p. 80, pl. 109; Fittschen and Zanker 1983, no. 169, note lb). 67. Berlin, StaatlicheMuseen 880 (Blumel 1933, no. R 110): Wood 1986, pp. 85-86, 112, fig. 55, pl. 42. Cf. also the mid-3rdcenturyA.C. sarcophagusin Beirut:Kochand Sichtermann1982, p. 385, fig. 414. 68. Agora , no. 44 (S-580), pl. 30; no. 45 (S-435), pl. 29. 69. Agora , no. 39 (S-387), pl. 26.

144

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

with portraits in Rome and Athens.70 The features of these figures are generally similar to those of our head. The eyes of the Rome and Athens portraits, however, are larger and more irregular in shape, the upper eyelids are wider, the lower eyelids thicker, and the inner corners rendered differently; and unlike the Corinth piece, both Athens heads have rasped faces, unpolished surfaces, and lack the deep furrow running down along the nose. The loss of the coiffure, head structure, and much of the face makes analysis difficult. Key elements are the hair pattern revealed by the curved break over the forehead and the wisp of hair in the triangle. Comparably shaped forehead, brows, lids, and eyes are seen in a portrait in Athens (NM 2143) dated to the early 4th century A.C.71The Theater head is also somewhat similar to a head found in the Corinthian Forum, with regard to the high, creased forehead, the hair pattern above it, and the eyes.72The Forum head, in turn, is similar to a Late Roman bust from Thessaloniki, and both have been dated to the late 4th century A.C. It is tempting to think that the Theater head represents a younger version of the Forum head, or, at least, a figure from the mid-4th century A.C. The Forum head has more indications of age, with creases beside the eyes, deeper creases in the upper lid, and additional grooves setting off the lower lids; the eyes are pierced with a smaller instrument. The high polish on both suggests high-quality work. The two portraits probably depict similar subjects who were likely important civic officials.73 There are suggestive affinities in the fine surface polish, angular form, and proximate findspots of this head and the torso of an imperial official (54), which was found in the upper cavea. The date of the Theater's destruction, about A.D. 365, appears to provide a terminus ante quem for the torso that is possibly also relevant for this head, which may have belonged to it or to a statue in similar guise and setting-likely the cavea or upper colonnade of the Theater. Torsos (34, 35) 34

P1. 49:a Togatus S-2838. Theater, near inner corner of east parodos pier, section 7d, lying east-west, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 465). Joins right foot (S-2838), from the Peribolos of Apollo, excavated 1966 (Corinth NB 332, p. 38). P.H. 1.810, W. neck 0.127, W. at shoulders 0.536, W. at waist 0.383, D. waist 0.315, H. plinth 0.078, est. H. 2.05 m. Twojoining pieces; statue broken diagonally through midneck; missing left hand, which was attached separately, and toes of left foot. Edges of folds chipped, outer surfaces worn and weathered. Bibliography: Shear 1928b, p. 479, fig. 3; Robinson 1969, p. 196, pl. 54, fig. 14; de Grazia 1973, pp. 247-249, no. 65, Augustan; Have-Nikolaus 1998, pp. 118-120, no. 16, ca. 10 B.C.-I A.C.;Katakis 2002, pp. 141, 281, note 108, Augustan. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. An over life-size male figure stands frontally, the weight on his right leg, his left foot flat on the plinth, each at an angle to the front. The head, carved in one piece with the statue, would have faced slightly to proper left, as the right sternomastoid projects farther and at more of an angle than the left. The figure wears a tunic and a

toga with the "overfold" (or sinus) pulled up over the right shoulder. A long triangular overfold hangs over the center of the torso. A small umbois held against the chest by the right hand. The first two fingers of the right hand were straight, as the breaks from the drapery show, the third and fourth bent back, possibly in a gesture of declamation. The left arm, held close to the side, is bent forward. The extended left hand was attached separately by a small dowel (diam. 0.010, p.L. 0.010 m), for which the joining surface was roughly prepared with a point. Drapery crossing the wrist would have masked thejoint. The edge of the toga encircles the back of the neck. The feet are shod in soft boots with a wide band that crosses near the ankle. This is probably the simple calceus, as there is no indication on either foot of ties hanging from straps around the lower leg, which occur in the calceus patricius.74The right foot appears to have been reworked in antiquity, possibly to eliminate the effects of weathering, for it bears the sharp cuts of a rasp or scraper. The feet are of similar shapes, including the raised small toe, and the plinth has similar tooling on the front and back segments; the right foot, then, was not an ancient replacement as Robinson had thought, but was repaired. The plinth is more smoothly finished

70. De Grazia 1973, no. 39 and pp. 184-185, citing Felletti Maj 1958, pp. 147-152, no. 150 (Rome, Capitoline Museums), fig. 60, pl. XX; no. 153 (Vatican Museums), fig. 63, pl. XX. Athens, NM 391: L'Orange 1933, no. 8, fig. 20. Athens, NM 1497: L'Orange 1933, no. 9, fig. 21; Rhomiopoulou 1997, nos. 59, 120. 71. Datsouli-Stavridi 1985, pp. 89-90, pl. 133. 72. Corinth S-77-13: de Grazia Vanderpool 2003, pp. 379-

381; see also de Grazia Vanderpool 1995. 73. On the Thessaloniki bust, see L'Orange 1961, pl. 27:1, 3; Rusch 1969, p. 131, no. P 37, figs. 46, 47, Theodosian. 74. The distinction is well illustrated on the Ara Pacis, where the Rex Sacrorumwears the simple calceus and the Flamen Dialis priests wear the calceuspatricius, the latter alone having straps; cf. Goldman 1994b, pp. 116-122, fig. 6:22.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA toward the front, which is also evident in other plinths, such as the plinth of 67. The tree-trunk support, which is almost completely masked by the left foot and drapery in front and only partly visible in back, is unobtrusive, as

145

is characteristic of Early Imperial supports. The support is treated with a heavy claw chisel.75 The execution of the piece is careful throughout. Early Roman.

The drapery of this Corinth togatus makes it one of the finest statues from the Theater. The toga is arranged in simple, classicizing folds that directly convey the underlying forms of the body. The position of the right arm, held inside the garment, recalls Late Republican togati, like those in Paris and Copenhagen.76 In the Copenhagen figure, a triangular arrangement of folds appears at midtorso, although it is not an overfold. The Corinth togatus appears more advanced than either of these, since it has an umbo and a sinus that extends to midthigh, somewhat like figures on the Augustan altar in Florence.77 The Corinth togatus displays stronger influence from the Greek himation, which is not surprising considering its mainland Greek origins. The plastic treatment of drapery is firmly rooted in Hellenistic traditions. The folds are sensitively undercut, contributing to the soft, rather elegant appearance. In fact, the reduced number of folds and centralized sinus are the means by which the sculptor has given graceful accent to the hip-shot pose and elongated proportions. Establishing an artistic context for the Corinth piece is complicated by the paucity of dated Early Imperial togati, especially from mainland Greece. Relief figures on the Ara Pacis present a variety of toga arrangements, some of which include a small umbo, held in place by the hand, and a short sinus that extends to midthigh.78 Statues in the round from Italy, like the Augustus in the Museo Nazionale Romano (Late Augustan to Early Tiberian) or the Claudian togatus from the Basilica at Ocriculum, display wider proportions and a denser, facadelike fold arrangement that obscures most of the body except for the bent knee; the sinus, moreover, extends to just above the knee.79 TheJulio-Claudian togati in Eleusis retain the outlines of this fold system, but break the facadelike effect by reducing the number of folds, revealing more of the body.80The comparison suggests that the Corinth togatus is earlier, which could place it in the Augustan to Tiberian period. The comparison also emphasizes our togatus's distance from the Italian manner, achieved by the Late Hellenistic elongated proportions, the influence of the Greek himation, and the presentation of the human figure as a three-dimensional entity.81The triangular sinus resembles Classical Greek overfolds, while also providing a graceful accent that unifies the sculpture. The togatus's drapery, with broad spaces between the folds and plastic rendering of ridges, recalls the statue of Augustus as Pontifex Maximus from theJulian Basilica at Corinth.82Although 75. On Early Imperial tree-trunk supports, see Muthmann

1951, pp. 28-29. 76. Paris,LouvreMa920: Goethert 1939,pl. 38:2;West1933, p. 94, no. 89, pl. 22, dated to time ofJulius Caesar;Goette 1990, p. 110, no. A b 78, last quarter 1st century B.C. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 1956: Poulsen 1962,

no. 28, pl. 40, pre-Augustan;Goette 1990, p. 108, no. Ab 39, pl. 2:4, third quarter 1st century B.c.;Johansen 1994-1995, I, no. 28. On the toga, see also Wilson 1924 and Stone 1994. 77. Florence, Uffizi 972: Goette 1990, no. B a 8, pl. 6:1, 2 B.C. On the length of the sinus, which reaches to the knee in this period, compare the figures on the altar of the magistri of the Vicus Sandalarius, dedicated to the Lares Augusti, now in Florence, dated 2 B.C.: Ryberg 1955, p. 60, fig. 31. 78. Wilson 1924, pp. 43-49, fig. 17:b, c; Simon 1967, figs. 16, 17, 19; Goette 1990, no. B a 3, pl. 5:5. 79. Rome, Museo Nazionale 56230: Niemeyer 1968, p. 82, no. 4; Goette 1990, no. B a 32, pl. 6:3; Stone 1994, fig. 1:8. Ocriculum, in Vatican Museums, Sala a Croce Greca 597: Niemeyer 1968, no. 3; West 1933, p. 194, no. 217, pl. 49; Goethert 1939, p. 193, pl. 43:1; Helbig4, I, no. 29; Goette 1990, pp. 120121, no. B a 151, Claudian, ca. mid-lst century A.C.

80. Tiberius(?): Kanta 1979, fig. 37; Niemeyer 1968, no. 7; Goette 1990, under no. B a 105, Late Tiberian to Early Claudian, possibly a reworked portrait of Caligula. Nero: Kanta 1979, fig. 39; Goette 1990, no. B a 248, pl. 11:1, 2. 81. For depictions of Roman men wearing the Greek himation, see Bieber 1959; 1977, pp. 129-147. 82. S-1116: Swift 1921, pls. 5-7; Corinth IX, pp. 71-72, no. 134; Niemeyer 1968, pp. 32, 82, no. 1, pl. 1:1; de Grazia 1973, no. 10, where dated Claudian because of its findspot in theJulian Basilica. Since the sculpture could have been moved, the findspot does not necessarily indicate the date; see, e.g., Goette 1988, pp. 254-258, pl. 38, Late Augustan; Boschung 1993, pp. 157-158, no. 114, pls. 178, 215:1. On the date, see also Harrison in Agora I, pp. 19, 86-87, pl. 43:f, Augustan; and Niemeyer 1968, no. 1, dated Late Augustan to Early Tiberian and contemporary with the "Gaius" and "Lucius" Caesar at Corinth. According to Fittschen (1977, p. 37, note 21), it is not certain that the Augustus is contemporary with the "Gaius"and "Lucius" Caesar. On the Caesar types, see also Massner 1982, pp. 54, 56, 59-60, pl. 15:c, d; Zanker 1973, pp. 47-51, pl. 35:a, b. See also above, 28.

146

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

the Augustus exhibits a more developed arrangement of the toga (larger umbo and longer si-

nus), it also appears to speak two stylisticlanguages, for it combines the outline of the Italianfold system of the Late Augustan period-as exemplified by the togatus from Formia in Naples with its diagonal emphasis-with slenderer proportions and a simplified fold system.83The Theater togatus's strong relationship to the Corinth Augustus reflects the potency of mainland Greek tradition and may also indicate that they are the products of related Attic workshops. The Augustus

is dated by some to the Late Augustan to EarlyTiberian period and is considered slightly later than the Theater togatus. Others, however, date the Augustus as Caligulan, because the sinus falls below the knee.84 Given the paucity of Early Imperial togati in Roman Greece, it is not clear for what length of time drapery arrangements influenced by Augustan monuments like the Ara Pacis may have continued or whether the Theater togatus could be a replica of an Augustan

figure produced in Tiberian times. The Theater togatus, then, could date from the Augustan or Tiberian period. The right foot was deposited in a pit in the Peribolos of Apollo by A.D. 300.85 Considering that

the right foot was not discarded until the Tetrarchicperiod, the Theater togatus appears to have

stood for a long time. In an earlier period the foot suffered some damage, possibly when the

sculpture was toppled over,perhaps by an earthquake,which necessitated refurbishingand reattachment.86The repair and continued display of the statue in the Theater, and the lack of evidence that the head, carved from the same block as the torso, was replaced, suggest that the subject was still recognized and of considerable importance to the city. Although the toga only

indicates that the subject was of the senatorial class, the calcei are another status symbol. On the south frieze of the Ara Pacis it is the priest of higher stature, the Rex Sacrorum,who wears the

older, simple calceus. In addition, the gesture of the Corinth togatus's right hand, possibly one of declamation, distinguishes this figure from other togati.87 It is possible that the statue represents an emperor, since togate statueswere a common format

for imperial portraits, and this would explain its continuous use until Late Roman times.88 The

togatus has the same stance as some togati that are certainlyof imperial subjects:the weight on the right and the head turned slightlytowardviewer'sright.89The fact that it was not shown capite velatoindicates that the figure is not making a sacrifice. The quality of the statue is substantially higher than that of its approximate contemporary the Doryphoros (20), which makes an imperial identification appealing. This contrast in quality drawsattention to the difference in status

between portrait sculpture, especially of the imperial family, and copies of Greek sculpture, a contrast that probably coincides with different workshops. If the togatus bore the head of an emperor, the Theater would have been a logical place for its display. Moreover, such an identification is supported by reference to the possible images of Augustus (2) and Livia (3), which appear to be reused in the sculptural assemblage of the Hadrianic scaenae frons. In fact, the togatus compares well in quality, marble, and scale with these two figures, and it is similarly constructed in that the head is carved in one piece with the torso. If it did form part of such a group, then the subject would have been Tiberius as emperor, with the 83. Formia togatus: Goethert 1939, pp. 183-184, pl. 39:2, dated Early Tiberian on the basis of the hairstyle of the female figure found with it; Goette 1990, no. B a 36, Late Augustan to Early Tiberian. 84. See Rose 1997a, pp. 138-139, no. 69, dated Caligulan based on facial structure and length of sinus; and de Grazia 1973, pp. 87-93, no. 10, Claudian. 85. Slane 1994, pp. 127-128. 86. Robinson (1969, p. 196) argued that the plinth was reworked to receive a replacement piece, although the point marks on it are consistent with tooling across the tops of other Early Roman plinths. On the pit in the Peribolos of Apollo in which the foot was found, see Slane 1994, pp. 127-128. The Latin inscriptions that were discovered in the same pit have no apparent correspondence with the building inscriptions from

the Theater. 87. See, e.g., Goldman 1994b, pp. 116-122, fig. 6:22; Koeppel 1987, pp. 121-123. 88. On the types and use of togate statues, see Rose 1997a, 74 (though he notes elsewhere [1997b, p. 112] that they are p. not well preserved in the East in the Early Empire); Goette 1990, pp. 1-8; Stone 1994; and Niemeyer 1968, pp. 40-43, where he notes the frequent difficulty of identifying togate statues as Imperial. Compare, e.g., the togate statues of M. Nonius Balbus of Herculaneum, in Naples, and that of Augustus, capite velato, from the Via Labicana, in Rome (Stone 1994, fig. 1:7, 8). Notably, the statue of this Balbus was set up in the theater at Herculaneum, even though he was not a benefactor of it. 89. Niemeyer 1968, no. 8, pl. 3:1, Claudius in Parma; no. 9, pl. 4:1, Augustus in Aquileia.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA

147

heroic nudity of Augustus reflecting his recent divinization. As Rose has pointed out, it would not be surprising for Corinth to have a Tiberian imperial family group, and its display in the Theater would be in keeping with such imperial representation in Early Imperial theaters at Gytheion, Volaterrae, Caere, Herculaneum, and AugustaEmerita,among others.90The absence of any heads from the proposed group at Corinth makes it difficult to discuss chronology. As the dates for the phases of the Theater are also quite general, one may only suggest that the Early Imperial group possibly represented here was dedicated in the first major Roman phase of the Theater, here phase two (see above, p. 4), which Stillwell dated generally to the Late Augustan to Early Tiberian period.91 35

Shoulder with paw, Herakles(?) P1. 49:b S-563. Theater, central stage building, 1903 (Corinth NB 26, p. 43). P.L. 0.220, p.W. 0.132, Th. 0.088 m. Single fragment, sliced off from shoulder. Edge and nails chipped, worn. Marble, white, fine to medium grained, with gray streaks. Part of a shoulder with lion's paw across it from a statue life-size or somewhat larger. Part of the cutting for inserting the arm survives, the joint masked by drapery that projects 0.030-0.042 m beyond the flat joining surface. A hole (diam. 0.005, L. 0.015 m) cut perpendicularly

into this projecting surface does not pass completely through, so it would not have secured the arm, but probably a second attachment, such as the lion's tail. All surfaces are roughly finished, as if representing the animal's skin or possibly indicating the back of the piece, in which case the shoulder preserved is the right. The statue may have followed the Villa Albani Herakles type, known through Villa Albani 741 and Vatican 1314, in which a standing Herakles wears the lion skin diagonally across the chest and tied over the right shoulder.92 Roman.

Limb Fragments: Arms, Legs, Feet (36-40) 36

P1. 49:c Right elbow S-565. Theater, tr. 34b, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 74). P.L. 0.135, p.W. 0.110, Th. 0.092 m. Single fragment; arm broken above and below elbow. Outside of elbow chipped; surface worn and weathered, with some discoloration. Marble, white, fine to medium grained. Right elbow from a figure somewhat over life-size. The elbow, bent at about a right angle, probably derives from a male statue, the strong modeling and vein on the left inner surface indicating the biceps are flexed. The inside, which probably faced front, is carefully smoothed; the back, evidently intended to be less visible, retains crosswise rasping from a tool with a fine bit. The scale and marble are similar to the Doryphoros head (20A), and the arm's position, bent and flexed, would be appropriate for a replica of that statue or a similar standing type. The work is much finer than that of the Theater Doryphoros, however, so they cannot be associated.93 Roman. 37

Pl. 49:d Right arm S-2561. Theater, east end of stage, west of block from arena pulpitum wall, 1948 (Corinth NB 112B, p. 117). P.L. 0.291, p.W. 0.125, W. wrist 0.105 m. 90. Rose 1997a, p. 139. 91. On Early Imperial groups from theaters, see Fuchs 1987, pp. 166-175; Rose 1997a, nos. 5, 6, 13, 19, 51, 58, 60, 63, 66, 74, 81, 97, 104; and see above, pp. 31-33. See CorinthII, p. 81, for Stillwell's date. For a detailed discussion of the phases of the Roman Theater, see Williams and Zervos 1988, pp. 108-120; 1989, pp. 28-36. A Tiberian phase of construction, with some reworking in the Claudian period, is also suggested by a dedicatory inscription, CorinthVIII, iii, no. 74 (P1. l:b). 92. LIMC IV, p. 761, nos. 652, 653, s.v. Herakles (Palagia),

Single fragment; arm broken near wrist. Missing large chip nearjoining surface, smaller chips from the upper surface. Marble, white, fine to medium grained; probably micaceous. Preserved is the right arm, slightly bent, which was attached separately in the middle of the upper arm to an over life-size statue. Since the rendering is generalized and muscular, the sex is unclear. The scale is larger than that of the Doryphoros's arm (20B), or that of Corinth S-1065, "Gaius" Caesar.94 The attachment surface, which preserves a cutting for a large iron dowel (L. 0.060, W. 0.017 x 0.024 m), has a joining surface finely prepared with a claw chisel and anathyrosis. Although it might be assumed that a joint through the upper arm would have been masked by drapery, this is not the case with the Antonine mantle statue (68), whose right arm was also pieced in the middle of the upper arm and secured by a large dowel. Thejoining surface of the Antonine mantle statue, however, is roughly worked with a flat chisel. The left side of Augustus(?) (2), of Early Roman date, also has a fine, claw-chiseled surface as preparation for a separately worked piece of drapery, although the attachment surface for the forearm of that piece is rougher than here. The skin surface both dated 2nd century A.C.; Helbig4, IV, no. 3340; I, no. 313. On tenon attachments in marble sculpture, see Claridge 1990. 93. For examples of the Doryphoros type, see Arias 1964, pls. 30, 39; Kreikenbom 1990, no. III 1, pls. 104, 105 (Minneapolis Doryphoros); Steuben 1990; and Meyer 1995. 94. S-1065: CorinthIX, pp. 72-74, no. 135; de Grazia 1973, no. 11; Pollini 1987, pl. 2; Maderna 1988, pp. 74-78, 236-238. Thejoining surface for the arm of S-1065 is smoothed, preserving no tool marks and no anathyrosis.

148

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

of this arm is smoothly finished, but not highly polished. The piece probably indicates the presence of an additional male portraitstatue in the Theater,and the finely tooledjoining surfacemayindicate an EarlyRomandate. Roman. 38 Male figure wearing calceiwith metal tassels

P1.49

38A Right foot P1.49:e S-3682-1. Theater, "north tongue of orchestra," in front of east end of scaenae frons, probablyin section 34d, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 473, plan p. 470). P.H. 0.155, p.L. 0.225, W. ankle 0.095, W. heel 0.085, W. foot at instep 0.104 m. Single fragment;foot broken above ankle, near base of toes, and from plinth. Surface chipped around upper break and left anklebone. Red pigment is preserved on the left strap and boot (10R 5/8). 38B Booted left leg and foot P1.49:f 64. booted to S-473/3610/T-887/Sc. S-473, leg ankle: Theater, tr. 34b, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 51; 26, p. 39). S-3610,foot: Museum marble pile. Upper leg, probably T-887/Sc. 64: Theater (Corinth NB 322, p. 773); found at L9, in East Theater Plaza, at 1.0 m above street level, 1929. P.L.leg with support 0.575, W. ankle 0.094, p.L. base of foot to back of knee 0.530, L. top breakto ankle 0.390, p.L. foot 0.215, diams. calf 0.110, 0.125 m. Threejoining fragments;leg broken through base of knee and above toes; object broken from front of calf. Missingsmallchips;front surfaceweathered,backdiscolored and encrusted.Tracesof red paint (10R4/8) on boot. 38A-B: Marble, white, fine to medium grained; micaceous; Pentelic. These feet have been associated because of similarities of marble, scale, and type of soft boot with metal attachments. 38Apreservesthe fragmentaryright, booted foot.

The even breakunder the foot indicates that it stood flat on the plinth and that the right was the weight leg. The forwardangle of the foot suggests a loose stance for the leg. Heavier rasping on the rear right side suggests that the foot waspointed three-quartersright.Strapslie across the instep and around the ankle, but tassels were not carved. At the front break is a dowel hole (diam. 0.005 m) at an angle, presumablyfor the attachmentof a metal tassel, in the manner of 38B. Other booted figures at Corinthderivefrom statueswearingshort tunicsand traveling cloaksor cuirasses;their tassels,however,are marble (note that the two mantle statues from the Theater [2, 68] are barefoot and of imperial date).95 38B provides the booted left leg and foot from a figure somewhatover life-size (ca. 1.80-1.90 m). The wedge beneath the foot shows that this was the free leg resting on the ball of the foot. The modeling is strong and clear. The boot is secured by straps that cross the foot and by two knotted ties at the ankle and lower calf. Dowel holes on both sides of each knot (diam. 0.005 m) denote the attachment of two pairs of metal tassels.At the upper knot each hole is 0.017 m in length; the bottom holes varyfrom 0.012 to 0.015 m. The holes do not go all the way through and preserve no stains from the metal. A small projection (L. 0.027, W. 0.013 m) has broken from the front of the calf, slightly left of center. This is not wide enough or in the right location to derive from a strut, but appears to come from an object, such as a staff or spear, that was carved in one piece with the statue.96The surface of the leg above this, however, is smoothly finished, so the adjoining object would have been located at some distancefrom the leg. Alternatively, the projection may represent a measuring boss, though it is oblong rather than round. It seems unusual for tassels to have been added in metal if the staff or spear was of marble. The leg is carefully smoothed in front, but retainsraspingin back.The upper ca. 0.06 m of the boot is smooth, with a vertical overlap or seam on the inside. Roman.

38A and 38B probably derive from a portrait of a personage of high rank, as is indicated by the type of boot, the calceuspatricius, which is painted red. This should be distinguished from the military sandal, or caliga, worn by three fragmentary figures from Isthmia.97 Simple calcei with cross-straps only on the feet are worn by imperial cuirassed statues as well as by nonimperial figures, such as M. Holconius Rufus, patron of the theater at Pompeii, and Celsus Polemaeanus, patron of the library at Ephesos. The calceus with two sets of straps, as worn by men of senatorial and equestrian class, is exhibited by the flamines on the Ara Pacis and the bronze equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius.98The addition of bronze tassels here recalls the reworked statue in the 95. Compare S-2232, from the South Basilica and north of "School"; and S-1081 (CorinthIX, p. 83, no. 150), from the South Basilica andJulian Basilica. 96. Cf. 74A, found in East Theater Plaza, which once had a similar thin object carved in marble against the left arm. In the podia reliefs, also, thin objects are carved in marble from the same block of stone; metal attachments are used to a limited degree, primarily on reliefs attached to the first story; see above, pp. 18-19. 97. Isthmia IV, nos. 64-83, which derive from three figures. Cf., e.g., DarSag I, 2, pp. 849-850, s.v. caliga. 98. On the calceus, see Goldman 1994b, pp. 116-122; DarSag

I, 2, pp. 815-820, s.v. calceus. For imperial examples with cuirass, cf. Titus from the Metroon in Olympia (Niemeyer 1968, p. 51, no. 43, pl. 13) and Nero in Istanbul (Niemeyer 1968, no. 37, pl. 12:1). M. Holconius Rufus, Naples, Museo Nazionale 6233: Zanker 1988, pp. 324-329, fig. 259, H. 2.02 m, after 2 B.C., with a later head; Bonifacio 1997, pp. 34-38, Augustan body. Celsus, Istanbul, Archaeological Museum 2453: Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, no. 144, Hadrianic; Fuchs 1987, pp. 44, 46; CILX 833, 834. For illustrations, see Goldman 1994b, figs. 6:22 (detail of Ara Pacis) and 6:23b (right foot of bronze equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius).

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA

149

Vatican Museums in Rome of Poseidippus, the poet of New Comedy, on which the added bronze laces implied his senatorial rank. A pair of booted Roman feet from Epidauros, each with two sets of bronze ties, provides a second example of this practice from the northeast Peloponnese.99 From the Corinth Theater, compare also 39B, where the calceus has the more common marble tassels. The bronze laces here, along with the red-painted calcei, indicate that the subject considered himself of high importance. The figure would have worn a short tunic or cuirass and cloak, as no trace of drapery adheres to the preserved left leg. A staff may have crossed in front of the free, left leg, and a statue support probably stood on the plinth at right, since there is no indication of a support against the left leg. As two of the three known findspots are on the central and east stage, this figure most likely stood on the stage, possibly in front of the columns, or toward the east end, away from activities on the central stage. 39

Male figure wearing calcei

PI. 50

39A Right toes from booted figure P1. 50:a T-161. Theater. Nearly illegible pencil markings on boot in same hand as on 39B reads "April ..., cavea VI." Possibly 1928 or 1929, from above arena wall (Corinth NB 323, pp. 28-40). Foot: p.L. 0.105, p.W. 0.066; plinth: H. 0.057-0.066, p.W. 0.114, D. 0.199 m. Single fragment; foot broken to right of big toe and across instep, plinth broken on three sides. 39B Booted left leg P1. 50:b S-167/3567. S-167, booted left foot on plinth: early excavations, inventoried 1899/1900, possibly from one of Babbitt's 1896 trenches in the central cavea or orchestra, 18b or c.Joins S-3567: Old Museum marble pile, probably from Theater, as penciled on the piece is "May 31, VI. 1.00," indicating cavea section VI, at a height of 1.0 m above orchestra level; orchestra or lowest cavea, 1926 or 1928. P.H. 0.575, p.L. foot and leg to midknee 0.480, p.L. leg 0.415, p.L. foot 0.255, W. calf 0.130, W. heel 0.076; plinth: p.L. 0.268, p.W. 0.141, H. front 0.060, H. back 0.077 m. Two joining fragments; leg broken from midknee at right to below knee at left, across base of toes; plinth

broken around foot. Missing chips from front, left side of leg, heel, top of foot; weathered, with root marks. 39A-B: Marble, white, fine to medium grained, large inclusions; micaceous; probably Pentelic. Two pieces from an over life-size figure, possibly imperial, are associated because of similarities of scale, marble, and workmanship. 39A depicts the front portion of a booted right foot standing flat on the plinth, near the front edge. An oblique incised line at left marks the beginning of a strap, but a sole is not depicted. The material (Pentelic marble with large inclusions), the scale, and the pencil markings support association with 39B. 39B is the left leg from a standing, over life-size male statue with the weight on the left leg. It has a boot with cross-lacing over the top of the narrow foot, tied twice at the ankles with two pairs of ties that are hanging down; the top band is set off; and there are horizontal creases in back. A rectangular strut is partially preserved on the outside of the calf. The skin surface is partially smoothed, but is still somewhat bumpy from shaping with a flat chisel. The sides and back of the leg and the boot retain light rasping, at horizontal and diagonal angles. Some white cement from its attachment to a base remains on the underside of the plinth. Roman.

Significant features of this figure are the short boot or calceuspatricius and the double ties. As with the previous figure (38), the calcei resemble the type worn by the flamines on the Ara Pacis and by the bronze equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius. These calcei denote a person of either the senatorial or equestrian class, and the bare calf indicates that the figure wore a tunic or cuirass that ended above the knee. The subject, therefore, is most likely a nonimperial Roman, as this type of boot would not be worn by a Greek general or by Ares.100 The leg is not large enough to be associated with the gorgon from the cuirassed statue of Hadrian(?) (4). The designation "Cavea VI" indicates an area of the central cavea, behind the arena wall and up to the Roman diazoma wall, where W. A. Campbell dug in March and April 1929, as shown in Corinth NB 323, pp. 28-79, plan pp. 3-4. At this time many workmen were removing a large amount of earth each day, and only coins and notable small finds were noted or 99. Vatican Museums, Galleria delle Statue 735: Amelung VatKat, II, pp. 469-472, no. 271; Zanker 1988, p. 30, fig. 23; Helbig4, I, no. 129. See also Ridgway 1990b. Attachment holes for sandal straps or shoe buttons are known from the Archaic period and later; see Morrow 1985, p. 25, pl. 22; p. 26, pl. 10:d; p. 29; p. 38, pl. 29; pp. 124, 143, 193, note 3; p. 84, pl. 59:c; and

on Roman shoes from Samos with holes for ties, p. 38, pl. 31. Epidauros: Katakis 2002, pp. 120-121, 142, 287, no. 130. Unlike the Corinth leg 39B, the Epidauros legs do not have knotted ties. 100. See above, note 98.

150

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

drawn;no marble arms or legs are mentioned. Since the foot of 39B was probably found in tr. 18b or 18c in 1896, these pieces most likely derive from a cuirassedportrait that was set up in the central cavea, central diazoma, or upper colonnade. These smaller pieces were probably left behind when the larger were removed for secondary use. 40 Left lower leg P1.50:c S-3250.Theater, eastern stage area, probablysection 3c, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 476). P.L.0.120, top break0.113 x 0.970, bottom break0.084 x 0.063 m. Single fragment;diagonal breaksat both ends of leg. Back bearing heavy brown discoloration. Marble,white, fine grained; micaceous. This piece, which probably represents the lower left leg from a figure about life-size,displaysa well-smoothed

front surface, but the back is slightly bumpy from shaping with a flat chisel. It does not belong with the legs 20C and 20D, which are slightly thicker and more roughly finished. In addition, this piece is not large enough to be associated with the Augustus(?) (2) (on which the bottom leg break measures W. 0.110, D. 0.120 m); it does not go with arm 37; and it is somewhat smaller than the feet 14D and 14E. Roman.

Because of its somewhat smaller scale, the varietyof white, streakymarble lacking heavy mica, and the finely smoothed finish, this leg bears the greatestresemblance to the youth of Monteverde type (19), the head of which is slightly smaller than the Doryphoros head (20A). The upward curve of the upper back break of this piece, however,appears to reflect the position of the lower edge of a mantle, and the dark discoloration of the rear surface possiblyindicates the running of red paint from the mantle. If the leg derives from a draped statue, it cannot be associated with

the Corinth Monteverde type, provided the Corinth statue follows the type.101The leg is from a statue that was intentionally broken into small pieces. SMALL-SCALE FIGURES (41-49)

P1. 50:d-f Head from statuette of Aphrodite(?) T-428/Sc. 57. Theater, south colonnade of Peristyle Court, northwest of east hospitalium, at 5e, 1.9 m above orchestra level, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 414). P.L. 0.083, D. 0.068, p.H. face 0.049, W. at eyes 0.038 m. Single fragment; broken diagonally from the chin to the back of the head. Most surfaces chipped and worn. Marble, white, fine to medium grained. A head from a statuette possibly of Aphrodite. The face forms a long oval, the cheekbones are prominent, while the eyes and brow are so soft that they are almost indistinct. The chin forms a point below the narrow, closed, downturned mouth. The hair is pulled into a knot on the back of the head, where it is held in place by a scarf wrapped around three times. A wide channel and a 41

drill hole divide the hair knot. A faint trace of a wavy hair pattern survives on the left forehead. The piece is carefully finished. The head was originally pieced, as is indicated by the probable end of a drill hole in the underside of the neck, but the broken surface here is partially smoothed, as if from secondary working. Although uneven, this surface lacks the picked treatment that is the usual preparation for an adhesive.102 The nature of the secondary use is unclear, but the neck break may have been smoothed in order to facilitate display as an "heirloom" or for reattachment to the torso. Secondary work may also explain the cut through the hair knot. Early Hellenistic.

The oval shape and soft, delicate rendering of this head suggest the influence of Praxiteles

and his followers and point to a date in the late 4th or early 3rd century B.C.The blurred transitions of the eyebrows and lids have a particularly subtle character that finds parallels in other

Hellenistic sculptures from Corinth.'03Narrowproportions and definite cheekbones produce a head structurethat appearsmore Classicalthan Hellenistic, thus establishingaffinitieswith works

like the marble statuette probably of Aphrodite in Boston, of ca. 300 B.C., rather than with the wider, more boneless faces of figures like the Crouching Aphrodite on Rhodes, usually dated ca. 100 B.C.104 The clear structural articulation also distinguishes it from the head of a maiden from 101. On the variableuse of Classicalhead types in the Roman period, see, e.g., Fink 1964. 102. On piecing techniques, see Claridge 1990; Ridgway 1990b; and Harrison 1990. 103. See Sturgeon 1998b, pp. 1-2, 6 (here 86). 104. The Boston statuette is thought to depict Aphrodite

because many terracottasof Aphrodite in the same pose have Eros on the shoulder; see LIMCII,p. 41, no. 287, s.v.Aphrodite (Delivorrias).Rhodes, ArchaeologicalMuseum 14808:Merker 1973, pp. 24, 25, no. 2, figs. 2-5 (possiblyRoman); LIMC II, p. 105, no. 1027,s.v.Aphrodite (Delivorrias).Cf.also Gualandi1976, nos. 120-127.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA

151

the Asklepieion on Kos, now in Stuttgart,from ca. 340-330 B.C.; the more Classicalconception thus may be a regional feature rather than a chronological one.105 A marble statuette from Ostia, now in London, supports a head that is stylisticallysimilar and The configuration of the torso also identifies also bears the motif of the thrice-wrappedhair.106 the Ostia statuette as Aphrodite. The Ostia piece, in which the left hand pulls the mantle up towardthe groin, is a variationof the Knidian type, probablycreated in EarlyHellenistic times.107 Although the coiffure of our piece is not alwaysrestricted to Aphrodite, she frequently appears with this hairstyle,as on the Parthenon frieze and on 5th-centuryB.C.vases.108 The body type of the Corinth statuette cannot be ascertained, but the demure expression seems appropriate for an Aphrodite, who might either have been draped like a philosopher, as the Boston piece, or have modestly held up her mantle, like the Ostia figurine. Although depictions of nymphs, girls, or Artemis, for instance, could also wear this sort of hair wrapping, the style and expression seem more appropriate to Aphrodite. This head is one of a number of good-qualityHellenistic sculptures that have been recognized at Corinth as works that survived the destruction of Mummius.109 Statuette of Aphrodite in Europa type P1. 51:a S-3575. Shear's excavations, probably from the Theater, 1926. P.H. 0.209, W. 0.129, Th. 0.071 m. Single fragment; broken at base of neck, left wrist, diagonally through knees. Surface weathered, encrusted; partially gray and calcified, as if exposed to fire. Marble, white, medium grained; probably Parian. The torso is preserved from a statuette of a standing woman wrapped in a mantle. The head, once covered by the mantle, faced three-quarters left. Inside the gar42

ment the right arm bends sharply at the elbow, creating a triangle at upper right and catenary folds below, and forming a second triangle that extends to the knee. The left arm bends forward at the elbow, and the left hand was attached by a small dowel. A similar practice of piecing is noted in other marble statuettes, such as 41 and 58. Most rasp marks are eliminated, and the surface is brought to a smooth, even finish. The treatment of the back is simple, although the folds and torso are modeled. The proportions from front to back are shallow. Hellenistic or Roman.

This is a fine reproduction of the Europa/Aspasia/Sosandra type and one of at least four such figures so far identified at Corinth, all on a small scale.110The Corinth statuette, with its lack of head, attribute, or inscription, does not contribute significantly to the question of the subject or artist of the prototype, which is thought to be a bronze of around 460 B.C.11 It is noteworthy, however, that many reproductions of this type were made in reduced size. This figure would originally have stood ca. 0.36 m high, 0.40 m with a plinth. Corinth has a number of sculptures of Parian marble that are small-scale works. The "Classicizing Corinthian," for instance, is a piece of excellent quality of a similar white, medium-grained marble,12 and others come from the Theater area, such as figures 43, 49, 64, 80, and 89, and the two larger heads 85 and 86. Smaller sculptures such as this one could have been imported readymade, without fear of breakage. On the other hand, if there was enough demand for the classical types in which the workshop specialized, a small workshop might have been set up in Corinth for certain periods of time, as we know was the case at Isthmia.113The type was sometimes used on a 105. Stuttgart, Landesmuseum 451: Kabus-Preisshofen 1989, no. 1, pl. 10. 106. Ostia, in London, BM 1577: Smith 1892-1904, III, no. 1577; LIMCII, p. 81, no. 729, s.v. Aphrodite(Delivorrias). For a discussion of modes of wrapping scarves, see Sturgeon 1998a, pp. 223-226. 107. See, e.g., LIMCII, pp. 49-52, nos. 391-399, s.v. Aphrodite (Delivorrias). 108. Parthenon: LIMCII, p. 133, no. 1404, s.v. Aphrodite(Delivorrias); Brommer 1977, pl. 179. Vases: cf. LIMCII, pp. 140141, no. 1474, s.v. Aphrodite(Delivorrias), krater in Paris, Louvre G 424 (ARV2 1077, no. 5); LIMCII, p. 97, no. 916, s.v. Aphrodite (Delivorrias), white-ground cup in London, BM D2 (ARV2 862, no. 22). 109. See Sturgeon 1998b and here, 77, 85, 86.

110. Corinth S-1897,from area north of "School":Ridgway 1981b,p. 442, note 81, where associatedwith S-1904,lowertorso with plinth, from north of"School"and Forum SC. S-1897and S-1904, although on the same scale as 42, are of a different marble, possibly Pentelic, and are of coarser workmanship. S-1051:Ridgway1981b, p. 442, from theJulian Basilica. 111. On the type, see Ridgway1970, pp. 65-69, figs. 105108; Guerrini 1974; Ridgway1984, p. 53, note 30; LIMCII,pp. 23-24, no. 148, s.v.Aphrodite(Delivorrias);LIMCIV,p. 76, no. 1, s.v.EuropeI(Robertson);Robertson 1992. For the Baiae replica, Naples, Museo Nazionale 153654, see Napoli 1954. 112. S-2609:Sturgeon 1982. 113. IsthmiaIV, nos. 22, 23, 101, for unfinished pieces, the last found in the Rachi settlement near the Sanctuaryof Poseidon.

152

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

large scale for Roman portraits,as seen in figures in Berlin and Rethymnon, but this small figure is not likely to have been a portrait.1l4 P1. 51:b Tripod support for Apollo S-3512. Shear's excavations, probably from the Theater, 1926, from the lower cavea, orchestra, or inner entrance to a parodos. P.H. 0.173, max. W. 0.127, W. top without snake 0.121, W. central shaft 0.057 m. Single fragment; broken through legs. Missing large chip from top, smaller chips from legs, snake; weathered 43

yellow. Marble, white, medium grained; possibly Parian. Preserved is the upper part of a tripod lebes with cover. The legs, attached at the rim, taper downward. A ring, carved separately from the central column support, connects the legs below the basin. Undulating around the column, a snake slides its head out from under the legs

to rest it on the basin lid. Two complete turns of the snake are preserved; its body has a low spine and no scales. The photograph (P1. 51:b) shows the front view. On the back of the piece the shape of the tripod is completely blocked out, but more sketchily finished than on the front. Just above the snake's head, a break probably indicates the position of the adjacent statue's arm or hand. Chips missing from one of the tripod legs (at left in the photograph) may indicate points of attachment to the statue that, if this was the case, stood with the support at its left. Although the original height is not preserved, the scale may indicate that the statue was somewhat under life-size. The carving lacks crisp details, the drill being used sparingly for undercutting. Late Hadrianic to Early Antonine.

The tripod and snake, common attributes of Apollo, frequently form a support for statues of this deity, as seen in the marble statuette of Lykeios type in Dresden and in some variants of the Apollo Kitharoidos of Cyrene type.115Depictions of Dionysos that adopt the pose of the Apollo Lykeios type generally do not appropriate the tripod support.116Sculptures depicting Antinous as a deity in this configuration sometimes appropriate this imagery, as in the elaborate support for the statue from the Hadrianic Baths at Leptis Magna, now in Tripolis.117In the latter support, in which the bowl and legs of the tripod are decorated with wreaths, Antinous's hand rests on the side of the tripod farthest from him, which was probably also true in the Corinth statue. A tripod support with snake, which is particularly common in Late Hadrianic to Early Antonine times, appears with the statue of Apollo depicted on a Hadrianic roundel on the Arch of Constantine.118 This date seems appropriate for the treatment of the piece at Corinth. The tripod with snake also appears alongside depictions of Apollo found in theaters. Compare, for instance, the colossal Apollo from the theater at Carthage, now in the Bardo Museum in Tunis. This nearly complete statue, 2.40 m in height, is restored in the central niche of the second story of the scaenae frons. Although the theater architecture is dated to the mid-2nd century A.C., the Apollo and the Hercules from the east niche (the supposed Dionysos from the west does not survive) are dated to the Early Severan period and are associated with the establishment of the Pythian games at Carthage in the early 3rd century A.C. The association between musical contests and the Carthage Apollo, which is a variant of the Apollo Kitharoidos type, reflects such associations elsewhere, confirming the appropriateness of Apollo with tripod support to the Corinth Theater.119 114. Berlin, Staatliche Museen 1518 (K 167): Kruse 1975, no. D 107; Wrede 1981, no. 303, Late Antonine; Kunze et al. 1992, no. 44. Rethymnon, Museum, from Lappa: Marinatos 1938, pp. 66-69, pls. 1, 2, Faustina the Elder, island marble; Wrede 1981, no. 298, probably a private portrait, A.D. 140-150. Marinatos 1938, fig. 30, illustrates another example from Hierapetra. For a small head of this type from Argos, found in 19731974, see AR 1980, p. 27; Kritsas 1979, pp. 222-226, pl. 156:a, b. Small versions, like the statuette in Cyrene, are notable for the careful and relatively faithful rendering; see Paribeni 1959, p. 92, no. 237, pl. 123. Cf. also the engraved carnelion in New York, MMA 81.6.145 (Richter 1954, no. 30; Mustilli 1939, p. 35); in Aquileia (Scrinari 1972, no. 45); and in Gortyn (Romeo and Portale 1998, pp. 236-239, no. 91, pl. 31). 115. Dresden, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen 127: LIMC II, p. 194, no. 39n, s.v. Apollon (Lambrinoudakis). Cf. the Apollo Kitharoidos of Cyrene type in Rome, Capitoline Museums 628 (LIMC II, p. 384, no. 61k, s.v. Apollon/Apollo [Simon]); Athens,

Agora S-2127 (Harrison 1960b, p. 370, note 7), a support from a statue ca. two-thirds life-size; and Corinth S-3429 (unpublished), a similar support from an over life-size statue. 116. See, e.g., Schr6der 1989, p. 12. 117. Leptis Magna: Kraus 1967, no. 264; Clairmont 1966, no. 38; LIMC II, pp. 379-380, no. 54:1, s.v. Apollon/Apollo (Simon); Manderscheid 1981, no. 325; Schr6der 1989, no. A 3, pl. 2; Meyer 1991, no. 1 61. 118. Muthmann 1951, pp. 21-22,211,213. Hadrianic roundel: Strong 1988, p. 177, pl. 114 (supports a lyre); Koeppel 1982b, pp. 496-497. 119. Carthage Apollo: Ros 1996; Muthmann 1951, pp. 22, 76; Reinach 1897-1930, IV, p. 56, no. 6. On the Apollo Kitharoidos type, see, e.g., Becatti 1935; LIMC II, pp. 383-384, no. 61, s.v. Apollon/Apollo (Simon); and Flashar 1992. On the Apollo Kitharoidos from the Theater of Pompey in Rome, now in the Palazzo Borghese, see Fuchs 1987, pp. 6, 9, no. E I 1.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA 44

P1. 51:c Dionysos in nebris S-673. Theater, tr. 34b, central stage building, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 77; 56, p. 66). P.H. 0.264, Th. 0.081, rest. W. shoulders 0.12 m. Single fragment; broken through base of neck, right elbow, left thigh, right knee. Surface chipped, worn, weathered; missing chip from the left shoulder where the arm was attached by a long dowel. Bibliography: CorinthIX, p. 36, no. 30. Marble, white, fine to medium grained. A statuette of a young male figure of elongated proportions stands on the right leg, with the right arm down and the left shoulder raised. A rectangular bunch of undetailed hair hangs below the nape. The position of the long hair and the neck next to the locks at the back indicates that the head was turned three-quarters proper right, toward the side of the weight leg. The head was worked in one piece with the torso. In front, the tips of two locks over the right shoulder contain deep, punched drillwork. The torso is stiffly frontal without much of a twist or curve. The abdomen is somewhat fleshy; a sharp

153

creasesets off the navel.No pubic hairis depicted. Breaks from the attachment of the right hand and of a statue supportare preservedalong the right thigh. The left arm appearsto havebeen raisedand held awayfrom the body, judging from the position of the dowel. A deep crease ending in a fork separatesthe right arm from the body. A comparablydeep crease and a fork set off the groin from the leg at right.120 The figurewearsa goatskin,or nebris,thatcrossesfrom the left shoulder to the right hip. This is barelyindicated in back. In front, short drill channels, 0.002 m deep, are cut heavilyinto the goatskinat sharpangles to the edges. Modeled ridges down the center emphasize the diagonal arrangement.One foot of the goat and, in low relief over the left side of the chest, the goat's head (withlong horns and stragglybeard) can be recognized. Tracesof red paint are preserved on the goatskin near the left shoulder. The skin of the human figure was once highly smoothed, perhaps even polished, as treatment of the front of the right thigh suggests. Mid- to late 2nd century A.C.

This figure, originally about 0.45 m tall, probably represents the young Dionysos, since it wears a goatskin, the hair is long, and it lacks a tail. A diagonal skin with goat's head detailed against the chest is worn by large-scale statues in Rome and Cyrene, whose identity as Dionysos is indicated by the surviving heads.121The Capitoline statue has been called a modest replica after a Hellenistic original and is one of many versions of this popular theme. Also wearing diagonal goatskins are statues of Dionysos or Bacchus in Rome, Madrid, Cherchel, and Richmond, which are generally shown with one arm raised, as here.122 Pointed ears, pine wreaths, or a tail distinguishes satyrs, who may also wear a nebris, as can Pan.123Even Antinous wears the nebris when depicted as a dancing satyr, as in the sculpture in the Conservatori Museums based on a Hellenistic prototype. The low-relief arrangement of the skin and detailed display of the goat head in our piece are most like this Late Hadrianic Antinous, though the arm positions are reversed.124Here, the punched drillwork, stiff creases, stiff pose, and highly polished skin are commensurate with a date in the mid- to late 2nd century A.C., as comparison with figures on Dionysiac sarcophagi attests.125Other versions of Dionysos from the same period also occur at this size and many are set up in theaters.126 If the sculpture was originally displayed in the orchestra or lower cavea, it may have been moved up to the stage area, where it was found, when the Theater was converted to an arena in 120. A satyr head at Corinth (S-2482) is of somewhat similar technique, though somewhat larger. The Dionysos head (94) is too large to belong with this torso. 121. Rome, Capitoline Museums, Galleria 38: StuartJones 1912-1926, I, no. 38, pl. 20; L/MCIII, p. 433, no. 102, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri), which also carries a himation over the left shoulder. Cyrene: De Franchi 1959. 122. Rome, Museo Nazionale 622, from Hadrian's Villa at Tivoli: Helbig4, III, no. 2217; Zanker 1974, p. 103, no. 5, pl. 77:2, classicistic, the nebris alone characterizing it as Dionysos; MusNazRom, I, 1, pp. 70-72, no. 58; Pochmarski 1974, pp. 8994. Bacchus, Rome, Museo Nazionale 113203: Zanker 1974, p. 24, no. 21, pl. 23:4; LIMCIII, p. 543, no. 6, s.v. Dionysos/Bacchus (Gasparri), Antonine. Note also the bronze in London, BM 223, formerly Castellani Collection: Zanker 1974, p. 100, pl. 75:5; and the headless statue in the Conservatori Museums: Mustilli 1939, p. 187, no. 107, pl. 115. Vatican Museums: Reinach 1897-1930, IV, p. 63, no. 1; Amelung VatKat, II, p. 306, no. 102e, pl. 29. Madrid: Reinach 1897-1930, IV, p. 63, no. 3; EA 1532; Ricard 1923, no. 28 (inv. 105). Cherchel: Reinach 18971930, III, p. 31, no. 4, with head. Richmond: LIMCIII, p. 450,

no. 279, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri), Grimani type. Cf. also a satyr on

Kos (Laurenzi 1955-1956, p. 111, no. 100) and Dionysos from the Roman baths in Argos (Marcade 1957a, pp. 438-439, no. 11), with diagonal skin, long hair, no tail, p.H. 0.75 m. 123. For the pine crown, see Matz 1968-1975, III, no. 216, pl. 227 (Baltimore), and no. 222, pls. 241-243 (Louvre); and Broneer 1962. For Pan in a nebris, cf. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 158, in Doryphoros format: Zanker 1974, p. 11, no. 10, pl. 6:6, Late Hadrianic to Antonine; Marquardt 1995, pp. 157-158, no. 32; see also Marquardt 1995, pls. 10:1, 3,14:1, 16:1. 124. Antinous, Rome, Conservatori Museums, Galleria 67, inv. 897: Zanker 1974, p. 99, pl. 75:1-3; Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 57; Meyer 1991, pp. 70-72, no. I 50, pls. 58-59. 125. Cf., e.g., Matz 1968-1975, II, no. 83, pl. 107:a (Verona); no. 85, pl. 103 (Munich), both Late Hadrianic. 126. Fuchs 1987, p. 186, lists 17 statues of Dionysos from theaters, but their size is not always known. For a small example at Leptis Magna, see Caputo and Traversari 1976, no. 21. On the nature and use of small-scale replicas, especially of satyrs, see Bartman 1992, pp. 43-87.

154

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

the early 3rd century A.C.The small figures 45 and 46 were probably found in the lower cavea to orchestra area also, suggesting that the stage in an earlier phase may have been reserved for larger statuary. P1. 51:d, e Satyr with crossed legs T-380/Sc. 45. Theater, "cavea, section VIII," probably from west side of orchestra or lower cavea, 1926. P.L. 0.302, W. at hips 0.126, p.Th. 0.175 m. Single fragment; broken through abdomen and lower legs; missing pubes and large segment of tree at back. Surface heavily weathered and encrusted. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. Preserved are the lower torso and legs of a nude male figure leaning against a tree trunk at back, from a less than half life-size statue. The figure stands with its weight on the right leg, the left leg crossed in front. The tree 45

behind it supports the legs, which lean strongly to the left. A narrow drill channel separates the legs, while a heavier one outlines the right leg against the tree. The figure has elongated proportions and is neither bony nor heavily muscular, but the fronts of the thighs and the abdomen appear flattened or stretched. The trochanteric depression is prominently modeled on the right, and the lower border of the pelvis is sharply set off from the legs. Front surfaces are carefully smoothed; short rasp marks remain on the backs of the legs. Chisel work textures the tree trunk. Mid-2nd century A.c.

The young figure, who leans languidly against a tree trunk with his free leg crossed in front, recalls Praxitelean leaning figures of the 4th century B.C.127 The pose, with the left lower leg crossed in front of the right, is close to that of the Pothos ascribed to Skopas or that of Eros playing the flutes, also called Skopaic.128Our piece is more likely to represent a flute-playing satyr, however, as the figure is older than the fleshy Eros type (note the long break for the genitalia) and is closer to the standing satyr in Paris or the seated sculpture in Cambridge.129Satyrswith crossed legs are popular in baths, where they are found on a similar scale throughout the Roman world, especially in North Africa.'30 Many of these figures show a more youthful subject with a projecting, fleshy lower abdomen, not the taut, outlined musculature as here, and the supports are beside them rather than behind. A bronze flute-playing satyr from the Villa of the Pisones in Herculaneum displays a comparably taut abdomen, although without the crossed legs.3"' The tightness of the abdominal muscles suggests awareness of the muscular control required for playing a wind instrument. The Corinth flute-player, therefore, is a variation on the flute-playing satyr type, which stems from the second half of the 4th century B.C.The Corinth version repeats the crossed legs to evoke the idea of resting and listening to music that is basic to the pose, but it places the support directly behind the figure, where it seems logical, increasing the tridimensionality of the composition. It may derive from a 3rd-century B.C. variation. The elongated proportions, outlining, and careful smoothing may suggest a carving date toward the middle of the 2nd century A.c.132

Two other satyrs at Corinth have tree trunks placed behind them. S-2729, also undraped and of different technique, has the legs crossed in front, but in reversed position. The other, S-36/ 1462, wearing a skin, displays an interesting use of a coarse-grained, two-colored marble in which 127. For illustrations, see, e.g., Rizzo 1932, pls. 48-54; P. Gercke 1968; and Vierneisel-Schl6rb1979, pp. 353-363. 128. On the Pothos type, see Lippold 1950, p. 252, pl. 91:3 (Florenceversion); Lattimore1987, esp. p. 416 and note 6; and LIMCVII,pp. 502-503, s.v.PothosI(Bazant).Eros:cf. LIMCIII, p. 909, no. 675, s.v.Eros(Hermary),terracottafrom Smyrna,in Copenhagen, late 4th century B.C.; p. 931, no. 989, terracotta from Myrina,in Paris, 1st century B.C.;and p. 973, no. 132, s.v. Eros/Amor, Cupido(Blanc/Gury), wallpainting in Pompeii,Villa of the Mysteries. 129. Paris, Louvre 595: Robertson 1975, p. 468, fig. 147:d. Cambridge:Budde and Nicholls 1964, pp. 51-52, no. 83; for other examples of the type, see Riemann 1940, p. 108, no. 160, probablyfourth quarterof 4th century B.C. See Ridgway1984, p. 83, on the Roman preference for single, small satyrs;Ridgway 1990a on 3rd-centuryB.C. sculpture; and Bartman 1992,

pp. 51-87, on small versions of the Resting Satyr. 130. Cf. satyrsfrom Cyrene (Manderscheid 1981, no. 268, pl. 35; Paribeni 1959, no. 334), Leptis Magna (Manderscheid 1981, no. 300, pl. 38), Cherchel (Manderscheid1981, no. 508, pl. 49 [flute-playing];no. 522, pl. 50), and Kos (Laurenzi19551956, pp. 77-78, no. 11). Variationsof this pose used in depictions of Ganymedehave been usefullycollected by Dacos (1961, pp. 384-391). For another satyrin an animated pose on this scale at Corinth, see S-2637 (Robinson 1962, p. 115, pl. 43:a, b). Cf. also Andreae 1998, Appendix, p. 7, no. I 1 30, pls. 32, 33, 2nd century A.C., formerlyBraccio Nuovo. 131. Naples: Bieber 1961b, p. 139, fig. 559. Cf. also Wojcik 1986, pp. 228-229, no. L 2, pl. 114. 132. Compare,e.g., sarcophagiin Munich:Matz1968-1975, II, no. 85, pl. 103; no. 86 (Modena), pl. 111, both Late Hadrianic.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA

155

the grayportion of the stone forms the tree trunk, and the white, the satyr.133 Clearly,satyrswere not confined to the Theater, but appear to have been ubiquitous at Corinth.134 P1. 52:a, b Satyr as support for Dionysos T-108. Theater, probably 1926, so from the orchestra to lower cavea area. P.L. 0.211, Th. 0.083, rest. W. 0.16 m. Single fragment; male torso broken near base of neck, diagonally from left shoulder to right hip, and above right elbow. From a second figure is preserved the right hand and the forearm, the front of which is missing. Upper back encrusted, front surface chipped and weathered. Marble, white, fine to medium grained; micaceous; Pentelic. A nude, standing male figure on a small scale. The head, now lost, faced three-quarters proper left toward a second, larger figure. This second figure rests its right arm across the shoulders of the first figure, its right hand on the latter's right shoulder. The break from the right forearm of the second figure lies behind the neck.

46

In the first figure, the central muscles are tensed, the abdomen tight, and the waist drawn in. There is no twist in the torso, which is remarkably straight and frontal considering that the figure supports weight on the left side and turns to look, perhaps upward, at its companion. The right upper arm hangs straight and a little back from the torso, while the left is hidden by, and probably extends behind, the second figure. The line of the back break, which runs diagonally from the left shoulder to the right hip, represents the line of the companion's torso. The proportions of the preserved torso are long and slender, and the sternomastoid muscles, collar bones, and bones in the upper chest are emphasized. The pectorals are broad, the nipples set far to the side, the linea alba straight, and the navel a circular depression. The bulge over the right iliac crest is prominent, the thigh tensed. 2nd century A.C.

This two-figuredgroup may represent a satyrsupporting Dionysos or an Eros and Aphrodite, rather than a rape scene or a youth and maiden engaged in the game of ephedrismos.'35In con-

trast to sculptural ephedrismos groups, such as the 5th-century B.C.group associated with the Hephaisteion or the Hellenistic group in the Conservatori Museums in Rome, the preserved figure here appears quite stationary and the composition distinctly one-sided.136In this piece the

larger scale and resting position of the lost companion's hand, just behind the head of the preserved youth, indicate that the torso supports a second figure. The hand, which has a fleshy palm and long, narrowfingers separatedby finely chiseled lines that end in small, careful drill holes, is suggestive of an effeminate figure, such as Dionysos.Aphrodite seems less likely to have been the companion, given the lack of wings on the preserved figure and hence its unlikely identification as Eros. Moreover, the thin, muscular torso is inappropriate for Eros. The lost figure is likely, then, to have been Dionysos. 133. Another example, Corinth S-56, from near Peirene (CorinthIX, p. 108, no. 231), a young figure in chlamysof similar scale, is also supported by a tree trunk at back. For S-2729 and S-36/1462, see the following note. 134. Cf., e.g., the following torsos: S-36/1462 (CorinthIX, no. 33 [unillustrated]),latterfrom south of Old Museum; 37, p. S-437, from Northwest Shops (CorinthIX, p. 108, no. 232); S-765, from north of St. John's (road to Sikyon) (CorinthIX, pp. 51-52, no. 64); S-918, neck to knees, diagonal skin, from Peribolos of Apollo (CorinthIX,pp. 50-51, no. 63); S-1190,like the Sauroktonos type, no recorded provenance (CorinthIX, p. 64, no. 105); S-2637, from Forum SW (Robinson 1962, p. 115, pl. 43:a, b); S-2723, right arm raised, skin at back, broken diagonally from object at right, found near Asklepieion; S-2729,torso with crossed legs and tree trunk behind, at more of an angle than here, possibly from "Kretika";and S-2830, Eros (with wings), legs crossed, against tree trunk, from Grid P:15/b-e, 7-8. On a comparablescale are the following nonjoining heads: S-451, larger, on same scale as torso S-918 (CorinthIX, p. 27, no. 18), identified as Apollo, despite satyr ear, by Ridgway (1981b, p. 442); S-724/2309 (CorinthIX,p. 54, no. 69); S-900, broken from a high relief, from the WestShops (CorinthIX, p. 54, no. 68), similar to S-1892; S-1892, from Forum SE, teeth

showing; S-2482, slightly smaller than S-2900, from Forum SC; S-2676, smaller and later than S-2482, S-2900, from Anaploga; S-2900, "Phrygian"or Ganymede, from Roman Bath (CorinthXVII, no. 110); and S-78-8,from Temple Hill, teeth visible, small drill holes at inner corners of eyes and outer corners of mouth, punched drillworkin hair, possiblyfrom a sarcophagus. For a dancing satyr on a neo-Attic relief at Corinth, see S-785 (CorinthIX, p. 136, no. 288; Ridgway1981b, p. 438). 135. On ephedrismos groups, see EAA III, pp. 356-357, s.v. ephedrismos(Stucchi); DarSag II, 1, pp. 636-638; REV, col. 2747; Thompson 1949, pp. 235-236, 241-243, 247-250; Mingazzini 1959; and Zazoff 1962, in which pls. 1-4 illustrate groups of boys, satyrs,and girls;in none of these does a hand rest on a shoulder. On other kinds of "vertical"groups, see Brommer 1978-1979. 136. Agora S-429:AgoraXIV, p. 148; Delivorrias1974, pp. 33-40, pls. 9-11. Rome group: Laurenzi 1955-1956, pp. 115116; Eckstein 1967. The game of ephedrismos is described by Pollux (9.119,122), but it maybe confused with cavalluccio.Cf. a 5th-centuryB.C. Attic oinochoe in Berlin (DarSagII, 1, fig. and a group in Pergamon (AvPVII, no. 2683, s.v. ephedrismos) 204; Krahmer1927).

156

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

Satyrs frequently appear as defining adjuncts of Dionysos, whether in relief, as in the Gigantomachy frieze of the Great Altar in Pergamon, or in the round, like the marble group in Rethymnon from Eleutherna.137 In some Dionysos and satyr groups, the satyr wears an animal skin; in some, Dionysos holds a kantharos or grapes in the hand that rests on the satyr; and in many, the positions of the figures are reversed from those here.'38 The composition of our two figures is similar to the Olympieion type, as represented by the unfinished group in Athens and the Rethymnon group.139In the Rethymnon group, the emphatic musculature of the satyr forms a marked contrast to the fleshy form of Dionysos, which may also have been the case here. The elongated proportions, frontality, and the pronounced treatment of the anatomy suggest a Late Hellenistic prototype for the Corinth piece, but the execution is likely to be Roman, possibly the first half of the 2nd century, if the date that Pochmarski has suggested for the Rethymnon group is correct. The same figure type is found in satyrs on Dionysiac sarcophagi, such as the one from Patras in Athens from the third quarter of the 2nd century A.C. The dancing satyr on the Patras sarcophagus shows a similar emphasis on collarbones and the bones in the upper chest, as well as the same straight, frontal pose and rendering of the waist, although the area under the epigastric arch is more strongly defined and the torso is more coarsely finished.140 The motif of a satyr supporting Dionysos and the associated use of this body type continue to be employed in Attic workshops producing trapezophoroi in the mid-3rd century A.C., as seen in the example from Megara in Athens, dated ca. A.D. 250-260. The Theater group was probably made in the first half to third quarter of the 2nd century A.C.141 47

Herm P1. 52:c, d S-2562. Theater, found by Stillwell in a marble pile from the earlier excavations, 1948. P.H. 0.163, W. herm shaft top 0.108, bottom 0.1110.119, Th. 0.133, W. neck break 0.060 m. Single fragment of shaft; broken diagonally through neck. Hair is chipped, surfaces heavily weathered, especially on sides and back. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. The upper portion of a small herm shaft. A single curl with spiral locks, carved with regular grooves, hangs down each side of the chest. There is no sign of an inscrip-

tion. Rectangular cuttings at the sides provide for insertion of arm "stumps," now missing, which were attached by small dowels. In back the herm shaft has a segment, wider than the main shaft, which increases in thickness toward the top. The rear surface is worked. The faint flat-chisel marks on the back may result from the removal from its original location. Both sides of the shaft are somewhat pitted, as if not completely smoothed. The irregular carving of the neck may reflect the fact that a beard projected over this area, but did not adhere to it. Roman.

The fragmentary condition of the herm makes the subject uncertain. The long, corkscrew curls and possible beard might favor identification as Dionysos, who is represented as a herm in the theater at Leptis Magna, though Hermes is also a possibility.142 137. Pergamon altar: LIMCIII, p. 470, no. 657, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri). Rethymnon: Pochmarski 1988, pp. 497-498, fig. 15; 1990, no. P 73, pl. 79. 138. See Schr6der 1989, pls. 15-22; Pochmarski 1990, pls. 62:1, 68-69, 72-73:1, 74-79. Pochmarski 1990, no. P 73, pl. 79 (Rethymnon), from the first half of the 2nd century A.C., shows the same pose as ours; no. P 36, pl. 72:1 (Volos, from NeaAnchialos/Phthiotic Thebes), of the mid-2nd century A.C., the reverse. 139. Olympieion type, Athens, NM 245: LIMC III, p. 450, no. 278a, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri); after an original from the end of the 2nd century B.C., according to Lippold (1950, p. 368); interpreted not as a type, but as a motif with variations by Willers (1986, pls. 27-30). The Athens Olympieion group is dated 2nd century A.C. by Claridge (1985, p. 116), and 1st century A.C. by Pochmarski (1990, no. P 20, pl. 67:1). Louvre type: LIMCIII, p. 450, no. 280, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri). On similar groups, see also Speier 1932, pp. 78-79, pl. 26; Amandry 1946-1948, p. 185, fig. 1, group in Venice; Kunzl 1986, p. 39; LIMCIII, p. 547, nos. 7082, s.v. Dionysos/Bacchus (Gasparri); Riemann 1940, pl. 32; and Aurenhammer in EphesosX, i, no. 46. For another small-scale

group at Corinth with one figure supporting a second, slightly larger figure with the arm around the shoulders, the smaller figure holding fruit in its drapery, see S-2801 (unpublished). On a larger scale, see S-134, a chubby child, perhaps Eros, with his right hand on his left shoulder, who has on his right shoulder a much larger hand from an over life-size statue (unpublished). 140. Patras sarcophagus, Athens, NM 1150-1152: Matz 19681975, IV, 1, p. 97, no. 4, pl. 5, top; Koch and Sichtermann 1982, pp. 420-421, 459, ca. A.D. 150-170/180. 141. For a two-figured group in Rome, see Pochmarski 1985. Other examples from trapezophoroi include: Pochmarski 1990, no. P 33 (Athens, NM 3494), pi. 71:1, late 2nd century A.C.; Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1993, p. 50, no. 45; Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 129, mid-3rd century A.c. For a 2nd-century A.C. example where Dionysos's hand is similar, see Pochmarski 1990, no. P 23, pl. 68:1, in Tunis, Bardo Museum. 142. On herms in general, see Wrede 1972 and 1985. Leptis Magna: Bianchi Bandinelli et al. 1966, figs. 77, 85; Caputo and Traversari 1976, no. 55, pls. 50, 51.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA

157

This herm is one of two found in the Theater, the other being the Tiberian portrait head that was attached to a herm (28). This herm may have functioned as a pier on the pulpitum front or possibly as a support for a statue or table.143Although it may have been used architecturally, it is

the only herm of its size found in the Theater thus far, so it does not indicate a series across the front of the pulpitum, as in the Odeion ofAgrippa in the Athenian Agora.144 The dismantling of the central stage as part of the expansion of the orchestra in the 3rd century A.C.explains the paucity of remains from this part of the building. So far none of the other herms on this scale at Corinth preserve a similar segment at back.'45The herm, though probably Roman because of its

find context and rendering, does not have the downwardtaper common in Attic herms of the Roman period.146 48

Statuette of Priapus P1. 52:e, f T-543/Sc. 60 (= S-3687-13). Theater, east end of stage building, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 479, at 3b). P.H. 0.074, W. waist 0.030, D. 0.025; support: p.H. 0.082, W. 0.050, D. 0.049 m. Single fragment; figure broken through neck, upper chest, and across knees, missing right hand, genitals, support broken at bottom. Chipped on chest, thighs, and drapery; support chipped on top. Right side heavily encrusted; marble gray at right, possibly from exposure to fire. Marble, white, fine to medium grained; possibly Pentelic. Male figure, shoulders held back, standing beside a

large support. The subject is wrapped in a himation, the right arm enclosed as if in a sling. The garment reaches below the hips in back, but in front it is raised to expose the phallus, now missing. One end of the himation hangs from the left arm. The object against which the image leans is over twice its thickness and may represent a column, a thick tree trunk covered with drapery, or a large phallus. The worked upper surface of the support preserves folds or creases around the top and sides. The statuette might have been used as a support for a larger figure, such as Aphrodite or Dionysos, which would have been attached both to the small figure at its left and the object. Hellenistic or Roman.

This small figure wearing a himation might be interpreted as Attis, an actor,an attendant to a deity such as Dionysos or Aphrodite, or the god Priapus,but the lack of the head and attributes makes identification difficult. Attis is sometimes shown exposing his genitalia by lifting his drapery, as this figure does, but his typical costume and pose differ from the Corinth statuette. The figure does not appear to depict a terracottatype related to theatrical production. Many theatrical terracottashave exposed phalluses, often enlarged.147The terracottaactor figures lack the motif of the garment above the genitals, which in the Corinth figure calls attention to what must have been intended as a lewd display.A connection with farce or political commentary, which has been suggested for the terracotta"exhibitionist"from Sardis,does not seem a possibility either, because the Corinth figure appears to be inactive and an adjunct.148 If the support symbolizesa phallus, then the figure would be making his exhibitionist gesture to call attention to the object behind him as well as to himself. In that case the figure might be interpreted as a temple attendant.149Dionysos then might seem the likely choice for the missing 143. A number of possible trapezophoroi have been found at Corinth, such as S-731, female head (Corinth IX, no. 233); S762, base with sleeping Ariadne (Corinth IX, no. 237); S-1469, Dionysos head, from Asklepieion; S-1527, frontal head; S-1600, head; S-1962, Phrygian head; S-2329, Herakles head; and S-7132, head. Cf. also the draped female figure backed by a pier on a base with a centaur and bull in relief, S-3745, and StefanidouTiveriou 1993, nos. 11, 39, 40, 69, 71, 102, 124, 127, 164. On table supports, see also Cohon 1984; Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1985; 1988a, pls. 57, 58; and Moss 1988. 144. Agora XI, pp. 139-140, nos. 219-225; note that these herms do not project as far from the background as a standard herm. For a herm in the theater at Perge, from a balteusof the orchestra, see Fuchs 1987, p. 147, and Bernardi Ferrero 19661974, III, p. 152, fig. 163; for other examples, see Fuchs 1987, pp. 113-114, nos. A III 1-4 (Verona); p. 103, no. A III 1 (Parma); p. 120, nos. A III 1-2 (Vicetia); and pp. 146-147, for general discussion. On herm balustrades from theaters at Leptis Magna, Augusta Emerita, and Perge, see Wrede 1972, pp. 123-

131. Some trapezophoroi contain vertical slots for arms, as here: from Athens, AgoraXI, p. 140, no. 227; and from Kos, Laurenzi 1955-1956, pp. 133-134, nos. 166-171. 145. For other small herms at Corinth, cf. S-202, once attached to an object, with narrower segment at back; S-2193, from South Basilica; S-3409, lower head with scraggly hair; and S-71-35, in Gymnasium. 146. Cf. Agora XI, p. 140. 147. For illustrations, see, e.g., Winter 1903; Webster 1960; 1961; Bieber 1961a, esp. pp. 39-42, 46-47, figs. 133-138, 187, 188, 194-198; and Webster and Green 1978. 148. Greenewalt 1971. 149. Cf. terracotta figurines on Cyprus depicting seated boys with exposed genitals, considered characteristic of sanctuaries of some male deities: de Ridder 1909, no. 16, pl. 7, with discussion; Myres 1940-1945, pp. 66-67, no. 465, pl. 18, on temple boys; Connelly 1988, pp. 4-5, with references; and Beer 1994, e.g., nos. 27, 130, 240, 5th and 4th century B.C.The type generally wears a short tunic, pulled up to expose the genitals.

158

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

Aphrodite, however, is somefigure, because of his traditional connection with the theater.150 times portrayed accompanied by a smaller figure of Priapus, exposed or exposing himself.151In several examples, Priapus is shown draped in an almost dignified fashion, wearing a himation with the right arm in a "sling,"as in our piece.152 The best parallel for the Corinth statuette occurs in a terracotta statuette from Egypt.153This

piece carriesthe head of an old man who staresat his member.A terracottafigurine in St. Petersburg is similar.154In neither figure, nor in other representations of Priapus, does the support resemble the Corinth one, which might be a symbol for the divinity. Although the shape of the break in the genital area does not preserve the outline of an ithyphallic phallus, the fact that this

area seems intentionally mutilated may reflect the obscene nature of the depiction. The plump thighs also seem in accordance with the frequently feminine aspect of Priapus. Priapus, whose cult is centered in Lampsakos in Asia Minor, is associated both with Dionysos and Aphrodite, and so he would be a logical presence among the finds from the Theater. In fact, a terracotta figurine depicting Priapus supporting Aphrodite was found in the northwest room of Building 5, east of the Theater.155The small size and poor preservation of the Theater piece

make dating difficult, but the proportions and lack of drillworkor high polish may indicate that it was made before the 2nd century A.C.,possibly in the Hellenistic period. 49

Statuette of Telesphoros P1. 52:g S-3601. Theater, central cavea, section V, March 4, 1929. P.H. 0.066, W. 0.044, Th. 0.035, W. break at neck 0.027, est. H. with base 0.10 m. Single fragment; broken through base of neck, from feet and support. Surface partially encrusted. Marble, white, fine to medium grained; possibly Parian. A statuette of nearly rectangular form presents a standing child completely enclosed in sleeveless cloak. The

cloak, fastened in front, forms a V at the neck and may cover a tunic. The material hangs in symmetrical folds over the arms, modeled beneath; the garment was raised to cover the head. Folds are rounded on front and sides such that, although the shape is basically cubic, the piece is clearly not a draped herm, for it maintains a feeling of volume.156 A few traces of red paint can be noted (1OR 4/8), one below the neckline in front, a second in a fold at left. Tool marks are removed throughout, and even the underside of the garment is carefully smoothed. Roman.

This statuette, completely wrapped in its cloak, has quite an appeal, despite its missing head and feet. Small figures of this sort, which resemble monks with a cloak pulled over the head, portraythe young Telesphoros-the name given to the "temple boy"associated with the cult of Asklepios. Sculptural depictions of the standing Telesphoros have been known from Greece since the discovery of the figures from Mantinea and Crete, the latter now in the Carapanos Collection.157These marble versions provide the closest comparisons for the Corinth statuette, The since they have more regular proportions than do those from Italy,Gaul, or North Africa.158 Corinth example shows no signs of an attachment, so it may be an independent figurine, rather 150. On Dionysos, see Farnell 1896-1909, V, p. 125, note 74; Jeanmaire 1978; Bruneau 1970, pp. 295-328. On Delos, herms of Priapus, see Marcade 1969, pp. 259, 367, 377, 402, note 6, no. A 350, pl. 21; p. 437, note 3, and p. 464, on hermaphrodite. See also Delos23, nos. 340-342 (exposers), 1214 and 1215 (phalluses). 151. LIMCII,p. 56, no. 449, s.v.Aphrodite (Delivorrias),Wurzburg terracottafrom near Smyrna;p. 68, no. 589, ivoryon Basel art market;p. 77, no. 680, terracottafrom Myrina,in Boston; p. 85, no. 763, marble,in Delos (cf. Marcade1969, pl. 48); p. 85, no. 764, marble, from Rome; most of these examples are of Late Hellenistic date. Cf.also LIMCVIII,pp. 225-226, nos. 365367, s.v. Venus(Schmidt). Related are hermaphrodite figures with arced mantle: Perdrizet1911, pp. 6-9, no. 2, pls. 2, 3; Walters 1903, pp. 250-251, nos. C 575-578; LIMCV,pp. 274-276, nos. 30-53, s.v.Hermaphroditos (Ajootian), with raised mantle. 152. LIMCII,p. 56, no. 449, s.v.Aphrodite(Delivorrias).On Priapus, see OCD3, p. 1245 (Parker);Rose 1958, p. 175, note 36; Roscher, 111:2,cols. 2967-2990; EAAVI, pp. 466-467, s.v.

Priapo(Paribeni). See Grimal 1969, pp. 46-49, on Priapus as protector of gardens and as a Dionysiacsymbol. 153. Perdrizet1921, no. 231, pl. 46, called a Priapusof Greek type. 154. Hermitage866 i, from Kertsch,H. 0.21 m:Winter 1903, II, p. 410, no. 5. 155. MF-1985-12:Williamsand Zervos 1985, p. 56, no. 21, pl. 34, found in post-Hadrianic2nd-centuryA.c. context. 156. Contrastthe somewhatlargerdrapedfemale herm from the Southeast Building at Corinth, S-2553:Sturgeon 2003, p. 362, note 41. 157. Fougeres 1890, esp. pl. 8 (Mantinea, H. 0.40 m), fig. p. 598 (Crete, H. 0.155 m), both dated Antonine to Severan (p. 599). On the type, see EAAV, pp. 674-675, s.v. Telesforo (Rfihfel), (Felletti Maj);LIMCVII,pp. 870-878, s.v. Telesphoros esp. p. 871, no. 13a (Mantinea), dated second half of 2nd century A.C.

158. See, e.g., Reinach 1897-1930, II, pp. 469-470; Egger 1948; and Deonna 1955.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA

159

than an appendage to Asklepios, Hygieia, or a child, with whom Telesphoros is frequently illustrated (especially on coins). The figure, however, could have been connected to such a group

only by a base,159but comparison with a figurine base at Corinth, which probablysupported an

Asklepios with small Telesphoros, reveals the more common format in which the right side of the

smaller figure merges into the draperyof the larger.160 Comparisons suggest a date in the 2nd century A.C. for our piece.161In fact, the Theater statu-

ette looks like a reduced version of a marble figure in Munich, probablyof Hadrianic date.162For lack of evidence, it is not possible to discern whether or not this statuette resembles Telesphoros in the Roman group that Pausanias mentions having seen in the Corinth Asklep-

ieion (2.4.5). Telesphoros seems not to have been represented with Asklepios in the Classical or Hellenistic period, but first appears with him sometime in the Roman period, becoming The head from a larger marble statuette of Telesphoros at popular in the 2nd century A.C.163 Corinth, discovered west of the Forum, provides additional evidence for his importance in the city. 164 ALTARS

(50, 51)

50

Altar of Dionysos(?) P1. 53 A-1044. Theater, probably near west side of orchestra, beneath Late Roman floor, 1926. P.H. 0.450, diam. 0.540, max. p.H. relief 0.050 m. Single fragment, broken at angles across the top. Bibliography: Corinth II, p. 126, no. 193 (unillustrated); p. 44, note 6, on the findspot, where referred to as two "splinters." Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. Round altar without base molding, broken below the crown. The original lower edge is preserved. The altar was decorated with three heavy swags of fruit with pairs of fillets hanging between them; one pair of fillets is flat, the other has undulating borders. The swags are arranged in three festoons. The lower end of the jaw of a sacrificial beast survives, hanging between one pair of garlands. This jaw resembles the lower jaw of the bulls' skulls on 51 rather than bulls' or rams' heads.165The position of the fillets indicates that there were three suspended elements. The lower parts of two central devices remain above the garlands, one of which resembles the lower portion of a stemmed vase, possibly a kantharos; the simple curve of the second suggests a phiale, wreath, or mask. From the thick garlands preserved on one side of the altar, a few leaves escape to spread over the background. The contents of the garland-fruit and flowers, as well as ivy leaves and possibly grapes or a pinecone-suggest that the altar was dedicated to Dionysos. For further discussion, see 51. Late Hellenistic to Early Roman.

51

Altar of Apollo P1. 54 A-1049. Theater, near orchestra center, 1926. H. 0.853, diam. 0.516 without reliefs, max. p.H. relief 0.045 m. Single fragment; broken irregularly around upper edge. Missing chips from garlands; heavily weathered all over, with lichen growing near the top. Bibliography: Shear 1926, p. 454; de Waele 1961, fig. p. 153; CorinthII, p. 126, no. 192, fig. 95; Hermann 1961, Appendix, p. 153, no. 48. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. A round altar with cyma recta and torus base moldings (H. 0.170 m), cylindrical body, and flat top. The Lesbian leaf on the cyma recta molding (H. 0.100 m) is worn and not deeply carved. Three swags once circled the tall, narrow drum, suspended from three (not four, as Stillwell) bucrania, most of which survive. Two garlands and part of a third remain. Fillets are tied around the garlands, the ends of which hang flat below the skulls and flutter in the space between them, where the thick ribbons trail off to incisions at the knotted ends. Between the bucrania in one section, probably the main view, a bird perched on a branch catches an insect resembling a butterfly or perhaps a moth (see old photo, P1. 54:a). In the second section is carved a patera. The third section between the bucrania appears to be undecorated. The garlands, which are composed of round fruit and pointed leaves, probably laurel, are thick, carved with some detail, and in differing heights of relief. The outlines of the garlands vary, with a few symmetrically arranged leaves extending onto the background. Weathering of

159. See, e.g., Roscher, V, cols. 309-326. For a small Telesphoros beside an Asklepios statue in Rome, Palazzo Massimo, see Becatti 1973-1974, pp. 19,23-24, pl. 8; for Telesphoros with Asklepios from the House of the Europa Mosaic on Kos, second half of 2nd century A.C., see MusKos, no. 101. Cf. Cook 1914-1940, II, ii, pp. 1080-1091 (Telesphoros); III, ii, pp. 11821183; for Telesphoros with Asklepios from the Kerameikos, see Freytag gen. Loringhoff 1987, p. 485, fig. 11; and for votive reliefs, e.g., from Thasos, Devambez 1942-1943, pp. 225-227, fig. 11. 160. S-2794, Roman work (unpublished).

161. LIMCVII, pp. 872-878, s.v. Telesphoros(Rfihfel). 162. Fuchs 1992, pp. 173-176, no. 25, figs. 177-181, H. 0.72 m, where 18 examples of the type are listed, either alone or with Asklepios or Hygieia. 163. See, e.g., Aurenhammer in Ephesos X, i, no. 30, with discussion. 164. S-2706, of white, coarse-grained marble, from Oakley House south; cf. also the boy in peaked cap on S-2793, possibly from a votive relief with Hygieia and Telesphoros (both unpublished). 165. Contrast the Samian altar: Fraser 1977, no. 178, pl. 59:a.

160

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

the garlands makes identification of the fruits difficult. The best-preserved bucranion is marked by holes that cross the upper crown and extend down the front on each side and around the eye sockets, while the inside of

the lowerjawretainscrosswisestriations.'66The altarwas set upright in the center of the orchestra in 1926. EarlyRoman.

These two cylindrical altars with bucrania and garland decoration were found in the orchestra, the more fragmentary (50) possibly near the west side, the better-preserved one (51) near the center. The system of decoration of the two altars is similar. Despite their weathered and fragmentary state, it is possible to discern that the garlands of each are composed of different elements: those of the first with ivy leaves, fruit, and possibly grapes or pinecones; those of the second with round fruit and laurel leaves. The composition of the garlands, therefore, suggests that the former was sacred to Dionysos, the latter to Apollo. The date of the first altar (50) is difficult to assess because it is so fragmentary. The greater width and the lack of a base molding are features that can be illustrated by monuments stemming from the mid-2nd century B.C. to the early 2nd century A.C.167The garland is thicker and there are more escaping leaves on one side than on the altar 51, so it may be somewhat earlier. The hanging fillets are similar, but those on 50 exhibit more movement. The findspot of the Dionysiac altar is unrecorded, but its present location at the western edge of the orchestra beside the drain may approximate its position in the latest phase of the Theater. Non-Dionysian altars have been found in other theaters. Most notable are the altar to Apollo from the theater at Arles, dated Augustan, and the altar to the Lares from the theater at Cerveteri, dated Early Claudian.168 The altar in the theater at Augusta Emerita is also thought to be to Apollo because of its laurel garlands.169The picture is somewhat unclear, however, because the findspots of many altars are unrecorded, especially of those that came to light some time ago. In fact, although many Roman altars to deities are known from theaters in Italy and the western provinces, comparatively few have survived from Greece and the East.170 51 finds good parallels in the grave altars of Sphendon in Rome and of Aimnestus in Paris, dated to the Augustan period or slightly later.7l On the Corinth piece the festoon is looped by the fillet four times in each swag, with the result that the garland appears quite confined and tubular as well as compact. The Early Roman funerary altar of the freedman Amemptus in the Louvre bears a garland comparable in width, although the carving of individual fruits is more open and detailed. This is also the case with the garland relief found near the Propylon at Corinth, dated to the first half of the 1st century A.C.172

Birds are often depicted picking at fruit on garland friezes,173but the motif of birds catching at butterflies or other insects, which derives from Pergamene art, seems popular especially in the 166. For the holes piercing the skull, see, e.g., the rectangular urn in Rome, Capitoline Museums 152 (Sinn 1987, no. 8), midto Late Augustan. For the lower molding on 51, cf. Sinn 1987, no. 13, a round urn in Naples, Museo Nazionale, Magazzino 19, Late Augustan. See also Honroth 1971, p. 26, notes 83, 85. 167. See, e.g., Berges 1986, fig. 35 (Rhodes; see also Fraser 1977, fig. 88:d); figs. 40-43 (Lindos); no. K5, fig. 50 (Istanbul, mid2nd century B.C.); no. K44, fig. 88 (Istanbul, from Kos, first quarter of 1st century B.C.); no. K 72, fig. 114 (Knidos, 1st century B.C.); no. K 86, fig. 126 (Bodrum, last quarter of 1st century B.C.); no. K99, fig. 135 (Aydin, from Nysa, Late Augustan); and no. K 112, fig. 146 (Aizanoi, late 1st to early 2nd century A.C.). 168. Hermann 1961, pp. 91-92, no. 22 (Arles); pp. 95-97, no. 31 (Cerveteri, in Rome, Lateran Collection). On Arles, see Zanker 1988, p. 326, fig. 256; also Gros 1987. For other deities in Greek theaters, see Schwingenstein 1977, pp. 49-62. 169. Hermann 1961, pp. 112-113, no. 44, probably of the 1st century A.C.;Melida 1915, p. 36, no. 2, pl. 4. Also from Augusta Emerita, see a garland frieze that, like those at Corinth, is less elaborate than those in Rome: Strong 1961, no. 57a, dated

Julio-Claudian; Garcia y Bellido 1949, pp. 416-419, pls. 298, 299. Cf. also the altar of Hercules Tutor of the 2nd century A.C. from the amphitheater of Capua, in Naples, Museo Nazionale: Hermann 1961, pp. 136-137, no. 62. 170. Hermann 1961, p. 35. On altars in theaters in Italy and the West, see Fuchs 1987, pp. 143-144,146; Drager 1994, p. 157. 171. Altmann 1905, pp. 62-63, figs. 55 (Rome, Villa Borghese), 56 (Paris, Louvre Ma 2170); Boschung 1987, no. 768 (Paris), Tiberian. Cf. also Kleiner 1980, with references; Gabelmann 1968. 172. Paris, Louvre Ma 488: Altmann 1905, pp. 116-117, pls. 1,2, Tiberian; Strong 1961, no. 53; Honroth 1971, no. 36, Claudian; Boschung 1987, no. 646, after A.D. 41. Corinth S-189, 1-5, festoons of flowers and grain, from an altar possibly to Demeter: Corinth VIII, ii, no. 8; Corinth IX, no. 291. Cf. also the Early Roman garland altar at Pergamon (AvPVII, no. 425) and the altar in the Vatican Museums, Sala dei Busti 785 (Golda 1997, pp. 99-100, no. 46, Early to mid-Augustan). 173. Cf. the Late Hellenistic altar in Istanbul, probably from Kos, with Nikai, garlands, and birds: Yavis 1949, section 59, no.

STAGE, ORCHESTRA, LOWER CAVEA

161

Early Imperial period. For instance, the motif is found on a pilaster of the Ara Pacis174and on two marble urns in Venice of the Late Augustan to Tiberian period.175The cinerary altar of C. Julius Proculus in the Museo Nazionale in Rome contains in the garland's curve a bird holding something in its mouth.176 This may be a grasshopper or locust, as the publication suggests, given its large, round head, although the wings resemble those of a butterfly or perhaps a moth. The slender proportions

and raised, wide tail help to establish the species of the Corinth "insect-

catcher" as a kind of song thrush.177The avian subject amid the overripe garland reinforces the impression of peace and prosperity. The Corinth Theater altars are plainer and less ornamental than their Italian counterparts. The Corinth versions seem to rely on traditional Hellenic aesthetics, in which emphasis is placed

on a sharp contrast between relief and background. The relief ground, for instance, is emptier than in either of the marble urns in Venice, achieving a "classical"sense of balance and restraint; and the treatment

of the garland and bird is more restrained

than on the Claudian altar in

Rome. An altar from the central Forum at Corinth displays proportions, moldings, and a decorative format similar to those of the Theater altars, though lacking the fillets.178 The location of the ritual altar of Dionysos in the center of the orchestra is traditional in the Greek theater, as is the presence of altars to several deities when needed for suppliants in particular plays. Indeed, multiple altars in theaters are attested by the plays as well as by archaeological finds.179 Altars to Dionysos or Bacchus are frequently decorated with reliefs of satyrs and maenads or with garlands composed of ivy leaves and grapes hanging from goats' heads, such as those from Otricoli in the Vatican Museums, of the Augustan period.180 One of the most familiar theater altars is the Late Hellenistic round altar with satyr masks and garland frieze in the Sanc-

tuary of Dionysos in Athens.'8' The two Corinth altars could have stood near the orchestra center in the Early Roman theater, but one or both might have been moved to the side when the Theater was transformed into an arena in the 3rd century A.C. OBJECTS AND FURNITURE (52, 53) 52 Two spearlike objects

P1.55

52A Spearlike object P1. 55:a S-580. Theater, tr. 34b, 1903 (Corinth NB 18, p. 75). P.L. 0.109, p.W. 0.078, max. p.Th. 0.063 m. Single fragment; broken on three sides. Outer edges chipped and worn. 38; Berges 1986, no. K 44, fig. 88:e, first quarter of 1st century B.C. See also the frieze in the Conservatori Museums, Braccio Nuovo, from a tomb on the Via Salaria: Strong 1961, no. 28, Late Republican. For other birds, see those illustrated by Altmann (1905, figs. 34, 36, 37, 80), and numerous examples from the Ara Pacis reliefs in Moretti 1948. 174. Moretti 1948, fig. 162. The image occurs at Pergamon in the mosaic from the "Altargemach" in Palace V; see Castriota 1995, pp. 51-53, fig. 63. 175. Venice, Museo Archeologico 44 and 156: Koch and Sichtermann 1982, p. 46, nos. 13, 14; Sinn 1987, p. 92, no. 6, pl. 4:e (Venice 156, mid-Augustan); p. 92, no. 7, pl. 4:f (Venice 44, mid- to Late Augustan); Sperti 1988, pp. 45-49, nos. 15, 16, Late Augustan to Early Tiberian. On Venice 44 (Sinn 1987, no. 7), note at lower right a bird perched on a tassel catching a winged insect. Parts of three birds were recognized on the painted arena wall at Corinth; see CorinthII, p. 94. 176. MusNazRom, I, 8:1, pp. 74-78, no. II, 12, Claudian. 177. Thompson 1966, pp. 148, 287; Pollard 1977, pp. 3435. Cf. also Lamberton and Rotroff 1985. See Toynbee 1973, pp. 276-279, on nightingales, blackbirds, thrushes, and

52B Spearlike object P1. 55:b T-219. Theater, Shear excavations, probably 1926. P.L. 0.118, p.W. 0.081, p.Th. 0.054 m. Single fragment; broken across top, at left, and through back; missing large area at left. Small chips missing around edges; surface worn.

finches. 178.1-2143:CorinthVIII, iii, no. 510; Fraser1977, p. 114, fig. 76:c. For a discussion of moldings at Corinth, see C. Williams 1982, p. 178, note 14. 179. Pickard-Cambridge1946,pp. 9-10,34,40, 71, 131-132, 147, 168, 212; Bieber 1961a, pp. 32, 35, 55-60, 72-73, 78, 89. 180.Hermann 1961,p. 151, no. 5 (satyrs,maenads;alsoAmelung VatKat,III, 2, p. 375, no. 7, pl. 159); p. 92, no. 23, three altarsfrom Otricoli (ivy garlands;Amelung VatKat,III, 2, no. 13, pl. 51; no. 62, pl. 68; no. 70, pl. 147). For a Hellenistic altar incorporating grapes in the garland, cf. one on Samos: Samos XII, no. 178, pp. 46,48, 215, pl. 93, Appendix pi. 27, late 2nd to 1st century B.C. 181. Rodenwaldt 1927, pl. 482; Yavis1949, section 59, no. 49, fig. 75; Bieber 1961a,fig. 752;Fraser1977, p. 113, note 148, fig. 75:a. Cf. also the Dionysos altar in the theater at Priene: Gerkan 1921, pl. 12;Yavis1949, section 34, no. 13a. On altars in theaters, see also Sifakis 1967, p. 51. On religious ritual in theaters, see Price 1984, p. 109; Bowermann 1913; and Berges 1986, pp. 26-28.

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

162

52A-B: Marble,white, fine grained;probablymicaceous. These two objects are of similar shape and size. In 52A an object resembling a spear tip in relief is affixed by two pairs of narrow pointed objects, from which three tips are preserved. A sharp central ridge, rising from a curved base, implies that the object depicted is metal. The even resting surface is carefullyworked with a fine clawchisel. No traceof a dowel cuttingremains.Although the object appears to have rested on a prepared surface as an insert, the cutting for it would have been shallow, judging by the height of the undetailed area near the

bottom (max. H. 0.008 m). The piece is probably Roman, given the find context. 52B also contains a verticalspear point and two larger pointed elements that crosseach other on one side, their tips overlapping the "spear."The "spear's"beveled surface suggests a metallic object, as do the smaller segmented or ridged objects. The resting surface on the bottom is even, dressed with a very fine claw chisel, as if prepared to be inserted into another object. No trace of a dowel cutting survives. Roman.

Both spearlike objects were probably used as inserts on a monument, perhaps a victory or honorific stele or a trophy that was set up in the stage, orchestra, or lower cavea area. The maximum preserved thickness of 0.063 m of 52A may indicate that the object on which this rested was at least 0.093 m deep, if 0.015 m is allowed at front and back for stability, although a

much thicker block may be more likely.The bottom of each object is a carefullyprepared resting surface. They could have been placed directly on a flat surface or set into shallow cuttings

prepared to receive them, as is suggested by the shallow, unworked area near the bottom of 52A. Although spears suggest a military context, they could represent one aspect of the career of a successful public figure who was honored for his civic offices and benefactions to the city.182 53

Two lions from throne arms

P1. 55

53A Lion from throne arm P1. 55:c T-436/Sc. 58. Theater, East Hall, north of east parodos, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 440). P.H. 0.062, p.L. 0.140, p.W. 0.068 m. Single fragment; broken at both ends, plinth broken at right; missing most of head. Chipped. 53B Lion from throne arm P1. 55:d T-436a/Sc. 58a. Theater, found with 53A. P.H. 0.057, p.L. 0.132, p.W. 0.084 m. Single fragment; broken at both ends, plinth broken at left; missing head. Surface weathered.

53A-B: Marble, white, fine to medium grained. These lions formed the ends of two armrests of a marble throne, with 53B on proper right, 53A on proper left. Each lion reclines on a plinth, its head down between its paws. Each is depicted with a thick mane, hair on the forelegs, and bony ribs and haunch, especially on the outer sides. The working is careful; tool marks are eliminated. Traces of drillwork survive only for undercutting the lion's muzzle on 53A and for marking the inside of the tail on 53B. They were not attached separately. Roman.

While it is common for the ends of throne armrests to be carved in the form of rams' heads, often supported by a sphinx, lions are less frequent.183 These quiet, recumbent figures may be transpositions upward from lions supporting throne arms.184Because of their elevated findspot, the fragments may have fallen from the east tribunal or the edge of the cavea, where they presumably decorated an elaborate marble throne. They appear to be too small to be associated with Trajan on the facade (1).

182. See Zanker 1993 for monuments celebrating the lives of political figures in the Hellenistic period. A. Ajootian has suggested to me in conversation that the spearlike objects resemble the long elements that project from fruit in cornucopias, as on Corinth S-906 (CorinthIX, p. 100, no. 214) and S3534 (unpublished). While a cornucopia would be appealing as an attributefor Livia,the objects in cornucopias are longer and thicker and look less like spears, and it is hard to imagine how the pieces from the Theater could rest on an object like a cornucopia that would be held at an angle. 183. See, e.g., the relief from the Asklepieion, Athens,

NM 1392 (Richter 1966, p. 21, fig. 72, mid-4th century B.C.; Karouzou 1968, pp. 150-151), and the grave stele of Demetria and Pamphile in the Kerameikos (Richter 1966, p. 21, fig. 73, of the late 4th century B.C.). Richter 1966 illustrates no examples of lions used as finials or as arms on thrones. 184. Kyrieleis(1969, pp. 197-198, pl. 24:2) presents the suggestion that another example of such transpositionis illustrated on a South Italian skyphos fragment in New York (MMA 11.212.12).

UPPER CAVEA

163

UPPER CAVEA (54, 55) 54 Torso of an imperial governor P1.55:e, f S-903.Theater,found in upper partof tr.18h, between second diazoma and back wall of Theater,near the stairs between cavea sections VII and VIII, 0.2 m below the surface, 1908 (Corinth NB 45, p. 72; 49, p. 86). P.L. 0.942, W. at shoulders 0.481, max. D. 0.331, W. neck 0.128 m. Fourjoining pieces; broken through base of neck, left forearm, right shoulder, and horizontally above the knees. Surfacechipped and worn;heavyencrustationon all sides. Bibliography: CorinthIX, p. 150, no. 325; Johnson 1924, p. 253, fig. 1, p. 264, dated late 5th century A.C.; de Grazia1973, pp. 282, 284-286, no. 89, dated mid-5th century A.C. Marble,white, fine to medium grained. Preservedis a standing,drapedmale figure, somewhat over life-size, wearing a belted, long-sleeved tunic and chlamys. Displacement of the clavicles indicates the head's turn to the right.The figure standswith his weight on the left leg, the right, free leg positioned slightly to the side and forward.The left arm, encased in drapery, is held down and close to the side, bent forwardat the elbow. The right arm is broken from its position crossing the chest, as indicated by the breaks.The outline of the right thumb and a smaller break for the lower part

of the right hand remain on the torso, revealing that at least the first two fingers were clearly separated from the torso. There is no indication on the torso of an object held by this hand or of a strut supporting it. Hammer marks, which stunned the torso around the right hand, suggest that the hand was intentionally pried off. The figure wears a long heavy cloak, which was fastened at the right shoulder by a metal fibula, round at the base, attached by two metal dowels (W. of holes 0.005 m). The surface was prepared for adhesive for a width of 0.040 m by many strikes of a flat-chisel edge. The underlying tunic is revealed at the neck and along the right side, where it is pulled up and bunched over a wide belt that is set below the waist. Across the torso, drapery folds are fairly flat sided with beveled edges, some with central depressions, while folds by the neck and hanging folds are rounded. The back is less detailed, but all front surfaces where not encrusted are carefully smoothed, even on the innermost surfaces next to the left arm. All traces of the rasp and most signs of the drill have been removed. Heavy weathering over the upper surfaces suggests that before it fell, the statue once stood outside where it was subject to continual drainage of hard water that caused heavy encrustation, as would be the case in the upper cavea. Late Roman.

This statue in tunic and long chlamys probably exhibits the portrait of an imperial governor and is one of the finest Late Roman marble statues from mainland Greece.'85As is typicalof this period, the draperyarrangement is somewhat schematic. Folds are nearlyflat with angular sides, suggesting the effect of bent sheet metal, as if the draperywere imitating bronze sculpture. Such metallic effects are not uncommon among Late Roman sculptures of hard stones, such as the porphyry group of the Tetrarchsin Venice. Folds are not articulated by drill channels, but by slanted surfaces projecting from the torso. Despite the low-relieffolds, the sculptor has created a believable sense of mass, achieved through the swelling form and the arrangement of folds over the torso. A metal fibula was separately attached.86 The Theater chlamydatuswould probably have had a tied bundle of scrolls on the statue plinth beside it, which would have acted as a statue support as well as a reference to the subject'sliterarybackground and possiblyalso to his administrativeand juridical activities. The drapery exhibits classical influence in structure, but in a late-antique mode. A classical sense of balance is conveyed by symmetricalfolds, and by the diagonal fold pointing up toward the left shoulder-in harmony with the head's turn to the right-which is echoed in the diagonal groove beneath the right hand. Stronger folds at left call attention to the weight leg, in contrast to greater revelation of the body through drapery at right and by material bunched between the legs. Although catenaryfolds appear between the left upper arm and torso, they are a minor element barely noticeable in frontal view, their function being to emphasize the raised 185. For a good discussionof LateAntique statues,see Smith 1999, esp. pp. 176-178, with references, on the chlamydatus. 186. Venice: Delbrueck 1932, p. 84, pls. 31-34; also pp. 11, 111-114, fig. 41 (drawing of fibula), pl. 50, the torso of a chlamys-statuein Ravenna;in figs. 45 and 46 note the position of the hand. Note the metal fibulae once attached to the Late Roman officialsfrom Aphrodisiasin Istanbul (Inan and Rosen-

baum 1966, nos. 242, 243). The number of sculptures from Corinth of dark or colored stones is not large and is not restricted to portraiture:see references in CorinthXX, p. 357. For portraitsof variegatedmarbleand limestone, see de Grazia 1973, no. 112 (S-3355), 2nd century A.C.;and de Grazia1973, no. 113 (S-1141), 5th to 6th century A.C.

164

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

left hip. The torso swells outward broadly in front, forming a contour analogous to the long, gradual curves of drapery suspended from the shoulders. The harmonious interrelationship of parts has been carefully constructed. This figure belongs to a group of Late Roman statues at Corinth depicting imperial officials wearing long-sleeved tunics and long chlamydes. The contrast between the Theater statue and the others is instructive. S-314, dated to the mid-5th century A.C., presents an entirely different system of folds, illustrating a later, unclassical use of drapery.187In that statue, folds cross the body in numerous, repetitive catenaries that mask and flatten an already shallow torso, and although the ridges of the folds are rounded, there is little of the plasticity of the Theater statue. The other torsos, S-819 and S-822, because of their more elongated proportions and extremely schematic renderings, appear to be later still, and de Grazia's dating of them in the first half of the 6th century A.C. is convincing.188 Johnson and de Grazia have dated the Theater statue to the 5th century A.C., a period in which dating is difficult because of the lack of fixed points. It is especially difficult in cases such as this, where the head is missing.189Hence, the fact that the sculpture was excavated from the Theater is important for chronology. Since Williams's recent excavations East of Theater have demonstrated that the Theater went out of use after its destruction in ca. A.D. 365-when not only the stage building but also the cavea were heavily robbed of blocks-the place of discovery should The classical system of indicate a date of no later than the middle third of the 4th century A.C.190 a classical revival in the and the seem commensurate with folds, proportions, plastic conception the middle years of the 4th century A.C.191If the treatment of the Theater chlamydatus seems less plastic than that of some of its Asia Minor counterparts, which are dated by their heads to the 5th century A.C., this conforms with the drier execution characteristic of Roman sculptures at Corinth in other periods and possibly with some differences between Greek/Cyrenaic and Asia Minor carving traditions.192 Notably, the context of this Late Roman statue differs from those of the Middle Imperial period, as it appears to have been set up in the upper colonnade. Similarly, a group of Late Antique official portraits at Aphrodisias were set up before the west colonnade of the Tetrastoon in front of the theater, not on the theater facade, as was common in the Early and Middle Imperial periods.193 The intelligent structure and extremely fine finish of the Corinth statue imply that the subject was a personage of clear importance to the Corinthians. Two prominent men known to be patrons of Corinth in the mid-4th century A.C. are attractive possibilities. Memmius Pontius Ptolemaeus Parnassius from Patras was honored around the middle of the century (prior to A.D. 357) with a statue erected in front of the West Shops.194The inscription on the statue base praises him as a patron of Corinth. On the base for a bronze statue found at Lechaion, the Corinthians honored a second patron of the mid-4th century A.C., Flavius Hermogenes, Proconsul of Achaia between A.D. 353 and 358, who was celebrated as governor, benefactor, and builder of the Lechaion harbor.195In the absence of an inscription that can be connected with the Theater statue, an identification cannot be verified, but it is clear from these two mid-4thcentury A.C. statue bases that this period provides appropriate possibilities. The findspot between the diazoma and the upper cavea wall suggests that the statue was set up in the colonnade 187. CorinthIX, no. 323, dated 4th century A.C. or later; de Grazia 1973, no. 88, dated mid-5th century A.C. 188. S-819: CorinthIX, no. 327; de Grazia 1973, no. 90, with mappa, the handkerchief used to signal the start of the games and to show support for them. S-822: Corinth IX, no. 326; de Grazia 1973, no. 91, with mappa or scroll. Two other Late Roman statues at Corinth date from the first half of the 6th century A.C.: S-925 (Corinth IX, no. 328; de Grazia 1973, no. 93) and S-2046 (de Grazia 1973, no. 92). 189.Johnson in CorinthIX, p. 150; de Grazia 1973, p. 282. 190. Williams and Zervos 1987, p. 31.

191. See Harrison 1967. There are good parallels in Inan and Rosenbaum 1966: no. 107, of A.D. 450-475, from Sebastopolis;and no. 243, pl. 178, ca. A.D.425-450, fromAphrodisias, now in Istanbul. 192. See Zanker 1983; Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, pp. 2629, 41-44; Rosenbaum 1960, pp. 10-13; for illustrations,see Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, nos. 202,242-244, pl. 178:1-4; and Smith 1999, pls. 1-12. 193. Smith 1999, p. 171. 194. CorinthVIII,iii, no. 502. 195. CorinthVIII, iii, no. 503.

UPPER CAVEA

165

that encircled the upper cavea. It seems unlikely that a statue would be dedicated here after the Theater had been robbed out, though the Theater may have witnessed some use through the 6th century A.C. PI. 56:a, b Right arm and hand 8.0 m east of west west 62. T-863/Sc. Theater, parodos, entrance and 6.0 m south of south parodos wall, 1.0 m below the surface, section Fl, as if it had fallen from the upper colonnade above cavea, section XII, 1929 (Corinth NB 323, p. 23). P.L. 0.201, p.W. 0.080, p.Th. 0.082, p.L. hand 0.123, L. to first knuckle 0.083 m. Single fragment; hand missing a large chip from the back, right side, and thumb. Some encrustation on back, as if from hard water while in soil. Marble, white, fine to medium grained; no evident mica. Right hand and part of forearm from a figure somewhat over life-size wearing a long-sleeved tunic. The worked surface for attachment near the wrist consists of a dowel hole (L. 0.028, W. 0.005-0.007 m) cut into a tenon (diam. at base 0.040, H. 0.008 m) that projects from a flat, outer surface (W. 0.014 m). The joining surfaces are lightly scored, the inner projecting surface more heavily than the outer. The hand holds a cylindrical curved object, both ends of which were attached using dowels (beside the thumb, round: L. 0.022, diam. 0.004; beside the little finger, ob55

long: L. 0.025, W. 0.008 m). Thejoining surfaces for these attachments differ. The one beside the thumb has a round segment (0.033 x 0.033 m) within which there is an oblong, wedgelike area (L. 0.029 m) at a slightly higher level; part of an additional cutting is preserved beside the little finger. Therefore, the attached object, presumably of marble, would have had a diameter of ca. 0.07 m at this point, with a projecting round tenon similar to that of the forearm. The prepared joining surface beside the little finger (0.030 x 0.033 m) is discolored purple, so the object affixed here may have been of iron. As the inside of the wrist, the hand, and the object are undetailed, this side faced the torso, the fist turned slightly outward. All planes of the hand are fairly flat and meet at sharp angles. Nails are not carved on the two surviving fingers. The close-fitting sleeve has crosswise folds, and the flat folds vary slightly in width and distance. This piece does not fit with any Late Roman figures at Corinth, thus it represents an additional statue of this period.196 Marks of a scratchy rasp or scraper applied at a diagonal remain on the back of the hand, but not on the last bend of fingers or left side, so these areas probably faced outward. Late Roman.

This right hand from a portrait statue indicates the presence of a second Late Roman statue erected in the Theater. As with 54, the statue wears a long-sleeved tunic, probably with a long chlamys-a characteristic dress of provincial governors.197Perhaps as an element of his costume, the figure held a cylindrical, curved object, possibly a mappa, like those held in the right hand by other Late Roman statues in Corinth, Selhuk, and Rome. Since the outside of the hand faced the viewer, the hand would have been held across the torso or down at the side, as in the figure in Geyre, rather than up in the "signaling" pose that is well exemplified by two statues in Rome. An iron handle for an object indicative of the subject's office might also be imagined, but not a scroll, which would be straight.198 marble sculpture, since arallels among This form of attachment surface does not find ready paras ag a simple metal dowel is generally set into a flat surface or recessed area for hand or arm attachments. The explanation may depend on the material after which the attachment was modeled. It looks more like a fitting for some kind of gear that a metalworker would devise than something produced by a marble carver. In fact, the best parallel is found in nozzle valves that form part of water pumps, as known from the Madrid pump and descriptions by Hero of Alexandria (Pneum. 1.28). The carver seems to have reproduced in marble a form much more intricate than necessary for this location: the projecting nozzle in a metal valve is designed in this way to allow the fixture to swivel. Here, the form of the attachment surface could be termed a "nozzle-shaped attachment" or "swiveljoint."199Why this type of fixture should have been devised for thisjoint is 196. The torso of an imperial official (54) had the right hand carved in one piece with the torso, but the break does not fit this hand. 197. See Smith 1999, pp. 176-178. 198. For discussion of the mappa, see Humphrey 1986, pp. 9, 24, 153-154; Smith 1999, pp. 179-180. Selcuk and Rome: Goette 1990, pp. 146-147, nos. E 13, E 2, pl. 45. For scrolls, see S-822 at Corinth and the "older magistrate of Aphrodisias" in Istanbul (Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, p. 180, no. 243; Smith

1999, pp. 177-178). Cf. objects carried by togati at their sides on the base of the obelisk of Theodosius in Istanbul, ca. A.D. 390: Delbrueck 1933, p. 188, fig. 66, pl. 88. 199. On nozzle valves, see Landels 1978, pp. 75-83, figs. 23, 24; and Schi0ler and Garcia-Diego 1990, pp. 53-55, fig. 7. A togatus in Florence of red porphyry appears from a photograph (Delbrueck 1932, pp. 54-55, pl. 11) to have a similar cutting to receive the left hand.

166

SCULPTURE FROM WITHIN THE THEATER COMPLEX

a puzzling question. Examination of Late Roman marble sculpture from Greece, such as the lifesize youth from Gytheion or the smaller figures from Epidauros, shows less reliance on piecing than seen at Corinth in the 2nd century A.C. It is not advisable to generalize from a single example, but in this case, at least, it can be said that the marble carver found a model for his attachment more readily in a bronze valve fitting than in marble sculpture.200 The association might imply that little marble sculpture was being produced at this point and that the means of forming such attachments was no longer part of the standard stone-workers' knowledge. The statue was probably made in the 4th century A.C., sometime before the destruction of the Theater ca. A.D. 375.201One of the latest sculptures set up in the Theater, its findspot, at a high level near the western opening of the west parodos, suggests that it had fallen from a higher level. The figure was probably given a key position at the outer edge of the upper cavea or in the upper colonnade, signifying the importance of the subject. 200. Cf. from Gytheion, Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 124; and from Epidauros, Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 119; and Katakis 2002, pp. 37-38, no. 34.

201. On the destruction date of the Theater, see Williams and Zervos 1987, p. 31.

9

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

culptureswere found in somewhatsmallernumbersin each of the entrancesto the The-

ater, in the east parodos, west parodos, Peristyle Court, East Theater Plaza and the area north of the east parodos, and in EastTheater Street. The grouping by findspot in this chapter is illuminating with regard to both numbers and subjects. As elsewhere, however, the picture is fragmentarybecause of the intentional destruction of the Theater and because of the later residential use of these areas, especially the parodoi and the area north of the east parodos. Sculptures found in the parodoi are either small fragments from large statuaryor parts of small statuettes. Dionysos (56, 61, 62) and Aphrodite (63, 64) are present in both parodoi, as are Demeter(?) (66), Kybele (59), and Hygieia (65) in some format. Like the stage to cavea area, the parodoi held sculptures of Dionysos, one-third life-sizeand larger.At least one statue of Dionysos is indicated near the outer entrance of each parodos. A rather different assemblage appears in the PeristyleCourt. There we have two over life-size statues, an Amazon (67) and a possible imperial portrait (68), a trapezophoros (70), a base for a bronze sculpture of a boy victor (71), a possible crown from a victor stele (72), and an imagoof Antoninus Pius(?) (73). The PeristyleCourt seems a place of some importancejudging from the size and type of works gathered there. The East Theater Plaza, on the other hand, where the figure of Hermes (74) stands holding his pouch, may be better conceived as an entrance than as a separately defined space. In addition, a bronze finger from an over life-size statue (75) was found here, but as its size makes it very mobile, there is no indication of its original location. Figures found in East Theater Street may or may not have had something to do with the Theater. The female portrait bust 78 may depict a donor of one segment of the Theater, and it may have been set up on the outside of the cavea or on the wayto the upper colonnade in order to call attention to her donation. Two statuettes possibly of Aphrodite (79, 80) reproduce types popular at Corinth. Partsof three votive reliefs (82-84) are presented here also, as they have no specific findspot indicated other than the Theater. EAST PARODOS (56-60) PI. 56:c 56 Dionysos, left hand with grapes No inv.no. Temporaryno. [192] 8-109.Theater,outer entrance to east parodos at street level, 1928 (Corinth NB 321, p. 591 at 12b, street level). Lost. P.L.0.070 m. Single fragment; hand broken through base of wrist. Marble. Left hand holding grapes, from a figure about onethird life-size. The notebook drawing shows that the

index finger and thumb are extended; the other fingers disappear into the grapes. This popular image is used in heroizing statues of the deceased, as the youth from near Gytheion, in Athens. Given the nonfunerary context here and the size, however, the piece probably derives from a small figure of Dionysos or one of his companions.' Roman(?), according to context.

1. On the Gytheion youth, Athens, NM 2779, see DatsouliStavridi 1984, p. 166, pl. 14:a; Rhomiopoulou 1997, p. 118, no. 124; and as a heroizing figure, Wrede 1981, no. 175, pl. 24:3,

dated A.D. 220-230. For related Dionysosfigures, see LIMCIII, pp. 435-436, nos. 119 (Cyrene), 120a (WoburnAbbey), 122e (Richelieu), 124b (Valentini), s.v.Dionysos(Veneri).

168

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

Head of Ganymede(?) from statuette P1. 56:d, e S-2584. Theater, east aditus maximus, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 494). P.H. 0.091, W. 0.073, Th. 0.084, W. neck 0.044; face: L. 0.060, W. 0.052 m. Single fragment; head broken through base of neck. Badly chipped and worn. Marble, white, fine to medium grained. Small head of a young boy wearing a Phrygian cap. The head was thrown back on the neck and turned threequarters to proper right. The round face, fat cheeks, and

57

chin emphasize the figure's youth. Facial features are set close together. The eyelids are lightly chiseled, the eyes shallowly set. The small, deep holes that mark the centers of the eyes, the nostrils, and the corners of the mouth reflect secondary work. The hair is undercut more at right, to detail the farther side. A raised segment of the cap extends from the flap at back to the area over the ears. Few original surfaces are preserved; on the evidence of these, the workmanship seems simplified. Hellenistic(?), reworked in the late 2nd to early 3rd century A.C.

This head wearing a Phrygian cap may come from a small statue of Ganymede, Attis, Mithras, Paris, a Phrygian, or an Amazon. Ganymede seems likely because of its youth.2 The pose, with head thrown back, chin held up and to proper right, may suggest that this is a small-scale version of the Ganymede of Leochares.3 A head of similar type, but better quality, found in the Great Bath on the Lechaion Road is interpreted as a depiction of Attis or Ganymede.4 A larger version possibly of the same type, for which the identification of Ganymede is preferred, was found at Argos in the Roman Baths.5 The facial shape and treatment of the eyes, which is similar to that of the Herakliskos head (86), suggest that the sculpture was carved in Early Hellenistic times, although it appears from the drill holes in eyes, nose, and mouth to have been reworked in the late 2nd to early 3rd century A.C. P1. 56:f Left arm from statuette S-3626. Theater, north of east parodos, probably at L-M7, as identified from Corinth NB drawing, 1929 (Corinth NB 322, p. 737). Max. L. 0.055, W. 0.012, Th. 0.009 m. Single fragment; arm broken below shoulder; hand attached separately by means of a small hole. Marble, white, fine grained; not visibly micaceous. A left arm that was bent at the elbow survives from a marble statuette. Although the arm was carved in one piece with the figure, the hand was pieced, which seems curious for such a small figure. No drapery crosses the arm, but the figure could have worn a sleeve that ended at the break. The narrow proportions suggest that the subject was a female figure, perhaps young, and the careful smoothing even in the elbow crease indicates that it was a work of good quality. Extensive piecing can be seen in Hellenistic statuettes from Delos and Rhodes as well as in small figures from other parts of Corinth. As the careful finish shows, piecing is not an index of quality, but reflects the economic need to make use of all leftover supplies of this valuable, imported material.6 Hellenistic or Roman.

58

P1. 56:g Fragmentary votive relief of Kybele S-3490. Theater, east of entrance to east parodos, in passage just behind the steps, at 1.5 m above pavement, 1928 (Corinth NB 321, p. 555). P.H. 0.113, W. 0.175, Th. 0.073, p.H. figure 0.100 m. Two joining fragments; figure broken through neck and lower legs. Front surfaces sliced or chipped off; surface weathered. Marble, white, fine grained, with pink streaks; micaceous; Pentelic. Kybele is depicted in relief, seated in a frontal position, flanked by projecting pilasters. The goddess wears a chiton belted under the breast and a himation over the right shoulder. The tips of her hair are preserved over the shoulders. The figure holds a phiale in her extended right hand, a large tympanum in her left, the upper edge of the tympanum discernible next to the pilaster. A lion reclines on her lap facing the right of the relief, its head barely visible. The carving is sketchy. The back of the relief is worked with a point. A claw chisel was used on the outer sides of the relief. Hellenistic(?).

59

The depiction of Kybele in 59, seated frontally, is well known both from statues in the round and votive reliefs. Small versions of the type, numerous at Corinth and in Athens,7 were inspired 2. Paris is shown as a melancholy youth with head inclined; see the examples illustrated by Dacos (1961). On the problem of identification, see Palagia 1980, pp. 33-34. 3. Bieber 1961b, p. 62, fig. 198; LIMCIV, p. 166, no. 251, s.v. Ganymedes(Sichtermann). In the Vatican Ganymede the head is turned to the left, so our version would be in reversed position. The head of the Sperlonga Ganymede faces forward because of the low position of the eagle in the assemblage: Kraus 1967, no. 263; LIMC IV,p. 166, no. 250, s.v. Ganymedes(Sichtermann). 4. S-2900: CorinthXVII, p. 77, no. 110, pl. 30, p.H. 0.15 m.

Cf. also S-711 (CorinthIX, no. 92), although this may represent a Dioskouros. 5. Marcade 1957a, pp. 445-448, no. 15. 6. See, e.g., Marcade 1969, p. 205, no. A 5400, pl. 26, the arm attached in the middle of an undraped area; p. 235, note 1, no. A 5001, pl. 45; Gualandi 1976, p. 53, no. 14, fig. 27; pp. 63-66, no. 18, fig. 36; pp. 80-81, no. 31, fig. 55. For other examples of pieced statuettes at Corinth, cf. 41, 42. 7. For other Kybele reliefs at Corinth, cf. S-1109 (CorinthIX, no. 57), from the Julian Basilica, of similar size, but not in a naiskos; S-1124 (Corinth IX, no. 56), same origin, similar size,

EAST PARODOS

169

by the statue of the Mother of the Gods set up in the Metroon in the Athenian Agora in the 5th century B.C. (possibly by Agorakritos), or by its Hellenistic replacement.8 It is the Hellenistic version that is more abundantly reflected in small marble votives such as this one from the Corinth Theater. The colossal version of this type, made for the Temple of Poseidon at Isthmia in the 2nd century A.C., emphasizes the importance of the sculpture and of the image of Kybele in this region.9 A seated statue of Kybele with the lion in her lap, found at the west end of the Forum at Corinth, and the Sanctuary of the Mother of the Gods on the north slopes of Acrocorinth (Paus. 2.4.6) underscore the continuing popularity of the deity in Roman Corinth.10 The findspot of the relief, in the small passage behind the steps leading into the outer entrance to the east parodos, could be near the relief's original location, perhaps along the wall of East Theater Street. 60

P1. 57 Mythological relief T-5/146a. Theater. Fragment with woman: in front of east end of stage, 1.8 m above orchestra level, 1928 (Corinth NB 320, p. 504 at 3b). Max. p.H. ca. 0.55, p.W. 0.320, Th. 0.165, Th. relief ground bottom to top 0.095-0.048, p.H. female 0.370, p.H. border 0.080, p.L. clamp cutting 0.030 m. Five joining fragments; relief broken on all sides, upper border partially preserved. One end of vertical clamp cutting preserved at upper right break, presumably cut into middle of block. Marble, white, fine grained; Pentelic. A draped female figure in three-quarters left view appears to defend herself in a crouching position from a standing opponent, presumably male, advancing from viewer's left (see P1. 57:b). Of the woman's head, only

the knot of her hair and the break where the head was attached to the background remain. The wavy line of hair crossing her bare shoulder may indicate where some escaping locks of hair or a thin veil have broken away. Her thin, sleeveless undergarment is fastened at her right shoulder; the left strap curves across her left upper arm, revealing her left breast. Light folds outline her right breast and curve over the rounded stomach. The himation is rolled into a thick bunch of even width surrounding the hips, then hangs over the thighs to the knees. The shoulders are narrow in relation to the wide hips. The modeling is soft, the rendering of the drapery sketchy. The male figure's pose is indicated by the raised left upper arm and the line of the torso along the break. The back of the slab is hammer dressed. Hellenistic or Roman.

The subject, date, and original use of this relief are unclear. The carving technique does not appear to differ significantly from the reliefs assigned to the scaenae frons. As there, the subject may be a combat, but the scale is too small to compare with the Gigantomachy, and the woman's garment and proportions are not commensurate with the Amazons. The Herakles series is the remaining possibility, although a specific Heraklean episode is not immediately obvious. The woman's proportions, which are characteristic of the Hellenistic period, differ from all reliefs of the facade. These proportions recall the use of Hellenistic models for some figures in the Herakles series, notably that of Cerberus.ll Because the woman's small breasts suggest that she is young and of marriageable age and her strap is falling off one shoulder, this may be an abduction scene. She could be cowering beneath the threat of her abductor or a protector. She might represent a local nymph, such as Peirene, approached by Poseidon, but no other specifically Corinthian scenes are suggested by the Theater reliefs. Perhaps this is a woman, attacked by a third party, whom Herakles eventually rescues, such as the daughter of Dexamenos whom the centaur Eurytion attempts to abduct. At least two 4th-century B.C. examples of Herakles reliefs no naiskos; S-1192 (Corinth IX, no. 58), no provenance, slightly larger, no naiskos; S-1193 (Corinth IX, no. 59), no provenance, slightly larger, no naiskos; S-1513, from the Asklepieion, in naiskos; S-2299, Forum NE, in naiskos; S-2341, Forum NC, in naiskos; S-2402, Kybele(?), Forum SC, in naiskos; S-2466, Kybele(?), Forum SC, in naiskos; S-2557 (FdD IV, vi, p. 43, note 3, fig. 27), South Stoa, double naiskos; S-2619, Acrocorinth, larger, no naiskos; and S-3324, perhaps Kybele, Forum SW. Athens: Svoronos 1908, pls. 116-120, 198, 239-240; Walter 1923, nos. 126-170; Vermaseren CCCAII, nos. 456-467. 8. Agora XIV, p. 31, pl. 31; LIMCVIII, pp. 753-754, nos. 47, 48, for seated votives; pp. 751-752, nos. 32-39, s.v. Kybele (Simon). The Corinth votive is close to Agora S-922 (Agora XIV,

pl. 31:b), minus the attendants; and to reliefs in Delos (A 5774, Marcade 1969, pl. 53), less pilasters, and Berlin (Lippold 1950, p. 187, pl. 67:2). Studies of votive reliefs from the Athenian Agora by C. Lawton and from the Athenian Akropolis by O. Palagia are currently in preparation. 9. Isthmia IV, pp. 23-24, 52, 86-90, 99. For a later version of similar scale on a double plaque with Artemis Ourania, from the UCLA excavations at Isthmia (IS 71-4), see Lattimore in Isthmia VI, pp. 39-43, no. 89; Isthmia IV, p. 4, note 11. 10. S-855: Corinth IX, no. 55; Isthmia IV, pl. 84:d. For the sanctuary, see Lisle 1955, pp. 92-93, note 293. 11. CorinthIX, ii, no. Hi1.

170

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

include a kneeling woman in the scene, although she appears behind Herakles as he advances against Eurytion.12 The scene is more intelligible if one visualizes the whole (see PI. 57:c, d). It is likely that only a small part of the woman's head was attached to the background, so it would have been larger than the break and possibly in three-quarter view, like the upper torso. An optical adjustment may have caused the unusual width of the hips, the broadening necessary because they would be seen from both sides. The torso would be crossed by the woman's left arm as she bends forward, as if to perform some activity. The background to left of her arm contains tooling different from the unsmoothed claw chiseling over the rest. This area, which contains heavy, diagonal marks from a point that are overlaid by smoothed claw, probably had a feature that required undercutting at an angle-for example, the man's left leg, projecting from the relief ground. The break on the man's arm shows that it was bent at an angle, and tool marks from undercutting the arm suggest that it was held upward, perhaps holding a staff. Instead of crouching to defend herself, the woman may be bending over to do something to his leg, such as fasten a greave or bind a wound. A marble disk in Munich, for example, shows Herakles seated while a boy standing in front of him binds his thigh, the wound possibly obtained while hunting the Nemean Lion, as in reconstruction A (PI. 57:c). A relief from the Esquiline Hill in Rome shows a young girl, her hair pulled into two knots, binding the wound of a larger, possibly male figure seated before her, as in reconstruction B (PI. 57:d). The Esquiline relief may depict the birth of Dionysos. Our relief may show a scene analogous to one of these. If the second figure is Herakles, this may be a Hellenistic relief reused in the Theater decoration; if the subject is the birth of Dionysos, the relief may have been placed by itself on the east end of the stage building where it would have been seen as one entered the complex. In that location, it could have been complemented by a similar relief at the other end of the building.13 WEST PARODOS (61-66) Panther head from adjunct of P1. 58:a-c Dionysos T-917/Sc. 70. Theater, west parodos, 1.5 m from west end, beside north parodos wall, 1929 (Corinth NB 323, p. 40). P.H. 0.116, p.W. 0.109, Th. 0.158 m. Two joining fragments; head broken at base of neck, missing all of left ear and canine teeth. Rest of teeth worn, right ear chipped; surface weathered and worn on back of neck, top of skull, brow, muzzle; muzzle partly blackened. Marble, white, fine to medium grained. Preserved is a panther head approximately life-size, the short, blunt-ended muzzle and rounded ears distinguishing it from a hunting dog. The right side of the 61

brow, cheeks, and muzzle are softly rounded. As preserved, no wrinkles or hairs are evident, though traces of five lines crossing the muzzle may reflect painted wrinkles. The eyes round outward, are not pierced, and are rendered without a drill. The mouth opens wide in a convincing snarl, revealing teeth rendered in some detail. The contrasting modeling on the sides of the face and the line of the break at the neck indicate that the head turned proper left and upward toward the accompanying statue, appearing to the viewer in three-quarter right view. The work is careful, and all tool marks have been eliminated. Heavy weathering shows that the sculpture stood outdoors for some time. Hadrianic.

This head probably derives from an adjunct or support for a Dionysos statue. The god would have stood to viewer's right, the animal seated or running to its left, turning its head back and upward toward the god. The scale suggests association with a figure life-size or over, such as that represented by the legs of Artemis (or Dionysos) wearing running boots (18), that probably 12. Vollkommer 1988, p. 27, no. 185, figs. 37, 38, an Attic pelike (Karlsruhe 75/36); no. 189, an Apulian oinochoe (Bochum S 1183), both dated ca. 340-330 B.C., around the time of Timokles' Middle Comedy play. 13. Munich disk: Lambrinoudakis 1971, pp. 60-78, pl. 7:2; LIMC IV, p. 827, no. 1597, s.v. Herakles (Boardman). Esquiline relief: Lambrinoudakis 1971, pp. 396-397, pl. 30. For birth of

Dionysos scenes, see Sturgeon 1977, pp. 52-53; LIMC III, 1, pp. 478-479, nos. 664-668; and as theater decoration, see especially the reliefs from the theater at Nysa (Lindner 1994, pp. 103-198), and from Side (Mansel 1963, pp. 137-138, figs. 116, 117) and Perge (Bernardi Ferrero 1966-1974, III, pp. 153, 155, fig. 165, ca. A.D. 200).

WEST PARODOS

171

stood within the first-storycolonnade. Because the plinth and support of the latter are complete and show no signs of an animal or an attachment, the panther head would seem to go with another figure. The snarling, open mouth, broad muzzle, and pressed-backears are appropriateto a panther, as comparison with a freestanding panther in Munich and a gem in Boston attests.14A panther accompanying Dionysos would recall a group from the Corinthian Forum and statues in Rome and Copenhagen, although in the latter two the animal heads turn in the opposite direction.'5 Given the variationsin statuarytypes evidenced at Corinth and elsewhere, however, the turn of the head may not be helpful in determining the pose. A group in Cherchel of a panther accompanying a satyrpresents another possibilitythat would fit comfortablywithin a theatrical assemblage. Presumably,painted markingswould have clarified the characteristicsof the animal.16The Gytheion statue of a youth likened to Dionysos is accompanied by a panther, the head of which is much more sketchilyrendered than ours.17The eyes of the Corinth feline are similarin shape to those of the lion from the Heraklesfountain at Isthmia,from the mid-2nd centuryA.C., though the carving here is more careful.18There is no sign of the running drill, so the figure was possibly carved during the major phase of sculptural work for the Theater. Tree-trunk support for Dionysos or P1. 58:d Antinous S-3564. Shear excavations, Theater, probably from west parodos, section G4, north side, 6.0 m from west end, at a depth of 1.75 m, 1929 (Corinth NB 323, p. 39). A second fragment, possibly from the same support, was found nearby at H4, at a depth of 2.0 m (Corinth NB 323, p. 37). P.H. 0.147, W. 0.215, p.Th. 0.134 m. Single fragment; tree broken at top and bottom and vertically from front to back. Missing some chips, weathered gray. Marble, white with some gray, very coarse grained; probably Thasian. A horizontal segment of a statue support decorated 62

with grape leaves and grapes is preserved. Parts of two leaves, two grapes, and a thick stem survive. One leaf is carved in some detail; the spines are in shallow relief. Holes, which are cut perpendicularly to the support, pierce the major lobes. Irregular incisions give texture to the thick stem of the vine. Flanking this stem, an undulating surface marked at regular intervals by horizontal grooves suggests more distant leaves. The second leaf, which lacks drill holes and is in lower relief, has stems indicated by incision rather than in relief. The first, more plastic leaf was probably positioned facing the viewer, given its more detailed treatment. A second support with similar decoration is mentioned in the notebook and may derive from the same statue. Hadrianic to Early Antonine(?).

The statue represented by this support likely depicted Dionysos and would have been one of two statues of Dionysos standing near the outer entrance to the west parodos (see 61, in white marble). As this sculpture is made of Thasian marble, it may have formed part of the same dedication as the statues restored within the curve of the porta regia (25, 26), which depict Antinous as Apollo Lykeios and Dionysos Kitharoidos. Tree trunks decorated with grapevines frequently serve as supports for statues of Dionysos. In a statue in Cyrene, the support is on the right, complemented by an active panther on the left. The support for the Cyrene sculpture is tall and wide relative to the height of the figure, which stands complete at a height of 1.53 m, with the tree about one and a half times the width of the thigh. A second Dionysos from Cyrene stands complete at 2.04 m, but the tree is taller and 14. Munich, Glyptothek:Wolters1928, no. 495, 4th century (one of two panthers); Richter 1930, fig. 33. Boston gem, MFA01.7593, Hellenistic or Graeco-Roman:Richter 1930, fig. on p. 9. The Peiraieusleopard has a powerfulface that makesa better match for the Corinth head than, e.g., the heads of a cat and dog in Athens: cf. Vermeule 1972, figs. 13 (leopard), 14 (cat), 8 (mastiff,from near the Kerameikos). 15. Corinth, S-69: CorinthIX, pp. 34-35, no. 28, found with an Aphrodite;Tucker1902, pp. 427-430; Edwards1993. Rome, Capitoline Museums, Galleria 38: Stuart Jones 1912-1926, I, pp. 112-113, pl. 20; LIMCIII, p. 433, no. 102, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri). Hope type, Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 2025: LIMCIII, p. 437, no. 128b, s.v. Dionysos(Veneri). Ny B.C.

CarlsbergGlyptotek 1644: Marquardt1995, pl. 26:2, panther with Dionysos and Pan. Vatican 1375 and Rome, Museo Nazionale 8606:Pochmarski1990, pl. 69:1, 2 (8606 also in Schr6der 1989, no. N 11, p. 17). 16. Cherchel Museum S90, from a bath: Landwehr 1990, p. 103, pl. 80; Manderscheid 1981, no. 522. For another panther head at Corinth, see S-71-23, from the Gymnasium. Toynbee (1973, pp. 84-86) notes the difficulty of identifying such animals in sculpturewhen markingshave disappeared. 17. Athens, NM 2779: Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 124, second quarterof the 3rd century A.C. 18. On the Isthmia Herakles, see IsthmiaIV,no. 30.

172

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

narrower than in the first and is the same width as the thigh. Hence, one cannot deduce on the basis of these examples the size of the missing statue here.19 Dionysian tree trunks and panthers also support portrait statues when the subject is likened to a deity, as illustrated by the funerary statue of a youth from the Gytheion nekropolis (Passava).20 The Banca d'Italia statue of Antinous in Rome also has a support of this type.21 Parts of two similarly decorated tree-trunk supports were found in the Corinthian Forum (S-810, S-901a, b/ 2169).22 S-810 is of similar scale to our support and displays vines and grapes that resemble ours in plasticity, technique, and marble. The Dionysian supports from the Theater may be products of a single workshop, active at Corinth in the Hadrianic to Early Antonine period. 63

Arm from statue of Aphrodite(?) P1. 58:e S-3612. Theater, west parodos, March 6, 1929 (Corinth NB 323, p. 24). P.L. forearm 0.185, p.L. upper arm 0.114, W. wrist 0.066, Th. upper arm 0.081 m. Single fragment; broken at wrist and through upper arm. Heavy encrustation on top and inside of arm; outside worn.

Marble, white, fine to medium grained. Left arm bent at a right angle, from a sculpture roughly life-size. The fleshy character suggests that the arm has broken from a female figure. The sharpness of the chiseled crease at the elbow indicates a Roman date. Rasping on the underside and inside of the arm suggests that it was held relatively close to the body. Roman.

The tensed muscles and right angle of the arm may suggest that the piece derives from a statue of Aphrodite with the left arm raised to cover the breast in the manner of a type known as the "Aphrodite with the bare left leg." This type may be of importance in this part of the city: the base of a statuette in this format (80) and possibly 91 were also found during the Theater excavations, and two further examples were discovered in the Asklepieion, north of the Theater. With this small fragment we may have a large-scale version of an important Corinthian type. The arm was found on the north side of the west parodos, possibly near the statue's place of display.23 64

Torso from statuette of Aphrodite P1. 59:a S-2559. Theater, found during cleaning, at a high level, north of the "WestHall," 1948 (Corinth NB 112A, p. 56). P.L. 0.113, W. hips 0.067, D. 0.048 m. Single fragment; figure broken through waist and knees. The surface is chipped, badly worn (especially in front), and encrusted. Bibliography: Soles 1976, no. 63, where no date or type is suggested. Marble, white, medium grained; possibly Parian.

Fragment of a standing, nude female statuette. The weight is on the right leg, the right hip is raised; the left leg is slightly forward. The legs are together as far as the knees. On the left hip is a break from an attachment (W. 0.015 m), on the right thigh a larger break (W. 0.030 m). The carving is simple, and sketchier in back than in front. No rasp marks remain on original surfaces. Stains, possibly from painted decoration, form two vertical stripes in front, as if from ribbons. Hellenistic to Roman.

Aphrodite is the most likely subject of this torso from a marble statuette. Traces for attachments exist on both sides, possibly for a drapery support at right and for a hand at left. There is no break indicating a hand covering the groin. The position of the legs, however, is similar to that of the Knidian Aphrodite, which has the weight on the right leg, so the piece could be a variation of this popular type.24 The struts suggest that at least one arm was down. Like many marble statuettes of Aphrodite, this figure may have been ornamented with painted deco19. Cyrene, Museum 14230: LIMCIII, p. 435, no. 119a, s.v. Dionysos (Veneri); Paribeni 1959, no. 317, pl. 150; Pochmarski 1974, pp. 82-84; for the taller figure from Cyrene, see Paribeni 1959, no. 322, pl. 152; both are of Pentelic marble. Cf. also, from Argos, Marcade 1957a, no. 12, from the Roman Baths; 1980, no. 246. The motif is popular in the 2nd century A.C.;see Muthmann 1951, pp. 37, 72-90. 20. Athens, NM 2779: Wrede 1981, no. 175; Rhomiopoulou 1997, p. 118, no. 124. 21. Meyer 1991, no. I 74, pl. 84.

22. S-810: CorinthIX, no. 211. S-901a, b/2169: CorinthIX,

no. 212. 23. On the type, cf. LIMCII, p. 80, nos. 712-716, s.v. Aphrodite (Delivorrias), a variant of the Agen type with "pudica" gesture (pp. 79-80, nos. 707-711). See also Sturgeon 2003, p. 363, note 45, and the lamp recently found in excavations for the Athens Metro. 24. Knidian: Fuchs 1983, fig. 234; LIMC II, pp. 49-52, no. 391, s.v. Aphrodite (Delivorrias). Bronze adaptation of the Knidian Aphrodite in New York, MMA 12.173: Brinkerhoff 1978, p. 28, pl. 2.

WEST PARODOS

173

ration, such as vertical ribbons down the front. The lack of rasp marksmay indicate a Hellenistic date.25 65

P1. 59:b, c Hygieia statuette T-1045/Sc. 78. Theater, west parodos, near first buttress at east end, section B5, 1.2 m below top of buttress, 1929 (Corinth NB 323, p. 87). P.H. 0.223, W. shoulders 0.094, Th. 0.063, W. neck 0.030 m. Three joining fragments, figure from neck to knees, head and right arm were attached separately by means of small dowels; left arm broken at elbow. Chips missing from neck, upper arm, right side; some encrustation. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. A standing female figure wearing a chiton and a himation fastened over the left shoulder, leaving the right arm free. The head faced three-quarters right, and the

weight is supported on the right leg. Low, full breasts indicate that the subject is a mature woman. This impression is confirmed by the shoulders, which are rounded forward. The drapery style is somewhat abstract, with angular curves crossing the front lower torso and parallel, linear folds in the left-side view. In front, long diagonal folds emphasize the pull of the mantle to lower right. Drapery surfaces retain rasp marks on the sides, but the front is polished; the neck is smoothly finished. A thick object carried over her left shoulder, which extended to the ankles in both front and back, was attached by a strut to the lower abdomen. Late 2nd to early 3rd century A.c.

This statuette presents a standing, mature woman in chiton and himation, who carries over her left shoulder a thick, curved object that once hung diagonally to her feet in front and back. The object resembles a long tube with a central ridge in front. It appears to depict a snake, rather than a wreath, despite the lack of scales and head. The snake compares with another from a statuette at Corinth (S-2293), which is carried over the shoulders, also ridged and without scales, and whose serpentine form clarifies its identity.26 In S-2293, the right hand is held toward the center of the chest, while the left holds an object at the side, in a pose possibly analogous to the Theater statuette. Some followers of Isis carry long, tubular garlands in a manner similar to that in which these snakes are carried.27 The format also occurs in imperial portraits, such as that sometimes identified as Faustina the Elder in Cyrene.28 The ridged back in the Corinth piece, however, is more appropriate for a snake's body. Therefore, the figure probably represents Hygieia or a priestess of her cult. The schematic treatment of the snake appears commensurate with that of the drapery. This feature, combined with the elongated proportions and deep carving to outline the torso, suggests a date in the late 2nd to early 3rd century A.c.29 The closest counterpart for the arrangement of chiton and himation and for the snake curving across the torso occurs in the Hope Hygieia type from the first half of the 4th century B.C., named after the large statue, possibly of Early Antonine date, from Ostia now in Los Angeles.30 Two statuettes from Epidauros depict women carrying large snakes in this manner, and inscriptions on their bases indicate that the dedications are to Hygieia. The Epidauros statuettes, also of Pentelic marble, are larger than our figure, measuring ca. 0.47 and 0.50 m in height. Dated to ca. A.D. 200 and to the first quarter of the 3rd century A.C., they are indicative of Attic workshops active in the northeast Peloponnese in this period. These workshops had a considerable output of small-scale dedications about a half meter in height and smaller for Epidauros and other parts of the Peloponnese. Our piece is a smaller figure produced by one of those workshops, which appears to have been dropped on the way into or out of the Theater.31 25. For Hellenistic standing Aphrodite statuettes from Delos, see Marcad6 1969, pls. 45, 46. 26. S-2293, from Forum NE (unpublished). 27. Walters 1988, pp. 26-29, 100. 28. Kraus 1967, no. 303; Rosenbaum 1960, no. 61, found in the Temple of Isis, Early Antonine; Heintze 1962; Eingartner 1991, no. 148. 29. That a high polish was sometimes desired on drapery of marble statuettes is illustrated by the male(?) upper torso S2318 (unpublished), from Corinth, Forum SC. 30. On the Hope Hygieia, see LIMC V, p. 565, no. 160, s.v. Hygieia (Croissant); Waywell 1986, pp. 68-69; Sobel 1990,

p. 87; and Mitropoulou 1984, fig. 142. 31. For figures of Hygieia from Epidauros, see Athens, NM 271 (Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 116, ca. A.D. 200; LIMCV, p. 559, no. 44, s.v. Hygieia [Croissant]; Katakis 2002, pp. 34-36, no. 32, Severan); NM 272 (Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 117, early 3rd century A.c.; Katakis 2002, pp. 31-32, no. 29); NM 1810 (LIMCV, p. 565, no. 171, s.v. Hygieia [Croissant]; Katakis 2002, pp. 26-28, no. 24, Hadrianic or Early Antonine, H. 0.72 m with plinth). Cf. Sobel 1990 for presentation of types, and Mitropoulou 1984 for photographs. Some statuettes of Hygieia stand on a single base with Asklepios: LIMCV, p. 561, nos. 81, 83, s.v. Hygieia (Croissant).

174

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

P1. 59:d Head of woman with headdress S-3614. Theater, "West part of Scene Building," section A2, ca. 5.0 m west of west end of scene building, 1.0 m above marble strosis, 1929 (Corinth NB 323, p. 95). P.H. 0.095, W. 0.121, D. 0.098, diam. object on the head 0.068 m. Single fragment, top of head; missing face from middle of cheeks down and large chip across nose and left eye. Top of head heavily weathered, most surfaces badly worn. Marble, grayish white, fine to medium grained. Upper part of a head in the round from a figure about half life-size. The hair, which is parted in the center, is pulled back from the face, covers the ears, and is held in place by a fillet. A shallow drill or point may have out66

lined waves on the sides, possibly more deeply at left. Elsewhere, the hair may have been detailed with a small running drill, although heavy weathering has obliterated most traces. The face is broad and round, the head relatively shallow from front to back. The eyes are shallowly set within thin, narrow lids, the upper lid extending beyond the lower. The upper part of the right eye may have been slightly pierced by the edge of a flat chisel. Behind the fillet the head supports a short, round projection or base with a slightly concave top that retains some light scratches. Although the projection may resemble a resting surface, there is no cutting for an attachment, nor is there any trace of a veil. Antonine.

The headdress worn by this figure resembles the kalathosworn by Serapis, which is sometimes low like this one, as in the example in the Sieglin Collection.32 As this head appears to be female, it may rather represent a deity wearing a short polos, or a funerary statue of a figure in the guise of such a deity.33A number of divinities wear the polos, such as Aphrodite, Ephesian Artemis, Hekate, Mercury, Terra, Fortuna, and the Graces, but the hairstyle and proportions are found together with a short polos only in depictions of Demeter.34 What may be deliberate smashing of the face suggests the figure was interpreted as a deity in later times. Similar facial shape and hair technique are found on a head in the Konya Museum identified as Crispina, the wife of Commodus, who reigned with him A.D. 180-187. The Konya piece provides the best evidence for the Late Antonine date of the Corinth head.35 PERISTYLE COURT (67-73) 67

Pls. 60, 61 Statue of an Amazon S-3723. Theater, found standing, facing east, 0.1-0.2 m above floor, on east stylobate of the North Peristyle Court, near southeast corner (not in East Theater Plaza), 1929 (Corinth NB 322, pp. 828, 854-855, at H9). P.H. from left shoulder 1.605, W. waist 0.445, D. waist 0.265, H. from base of clavicle to plinth 1.535, H. neck to belt 0.345, H. belt to bottom of skirt 0.410, H. bottom skirt to plinth 0.838; neck socket: W. 0.171-0.197, p.D. 0.117-0.144, W. bottom 0.115; H. wedge beneath foot 0.125; est. H. 1.90, est. H. head 0.254 m (based on comparison with Corinth S-1065). Single fragment, head and arms were attached; missing large portion of upper back and shoulders, presumably broken when arms were removed. Heavy encrustation on back, legs, and left boot; surfaces weathered yellow. Possible traces of red and black pigment in central circle of belt; stains from paint on cross-straps (see P1. 60:c). Bibliography: Shear 1929, pp. 534-536, pl. IX; de Waele 1930, p. 54; Sturgeon 1995; not listed in LIMC I, pp. 586-653, s.v. Amazones(Devambez, Kauffmann-Sama-

ras), LIMC II, pp. 618-753, s.v. Artemis (Kahil), or pp. 792-849, s.v. Artemis/Diana (Simon). Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. An over life-size female stands on her right leg; her free leg is pulled back to rest on its toes. The figure wears a chitoniskos without an overfold, fastened at the shoulders and reaching to midthigh. A strap, possibly to support a quiver, crosses the upper torso in an X-pattern. No trace of the strap survives on the back, where it was probably covered by the bunching of the garment. The belt bears an incised running spiral, ending in a pair of ivy leaves flanking a recessed central oval, set within two points. High, laced boots complete the costume. There is no dowel cutting to secure the head tenon in place. Most likely, the statue was considered sufficiently well balanced without it. Reconstruction of the arms depends on the angles of the joining surfaces, dowel holes, and breaks (see P1. 61:b). The left arm is situated at a higher level than the right, with the nearly flatjoining surface angled to the right. The joining surface for the right arm extends farther down the side and is nearly vertical. Both cuttings are angled upward, and both arm

32. Bieber 1961b, fig. 388. On Serapis,see Hornbostel 1973 and Milleker 1985. 33. EAAIV,pp. 294-295, s.v.kalathos(Longo); Palagia1990; Beschi 1969-1970, for funerarybusts with short poloi, esp. pp. 324-325, 336, figs. 4, 5, 61-66, where the chthonic and divine

nature of the polos is emphasized. 34. LIMC IV, p. 854, no. 74, s.v. Demeter(Beschi), Kos, statuette from Kyparissi; p. 854, no. 71. For Demeter at Corinth, see CorinthXVIII, iii, esp. pp. 1-8 on sources; and note 33 above. 35. Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, no. 57.

PERISTYLE COURT

attachments were arranged so that the drapery folds would mask the joints. Stains indicate that the dowels were of iron. The height and angles of the joining surfaces suggest that the right arm washeld down and fairly close to the side, while the left was raised and flexed, perhaps holding a spear or reaching into a quiver. The greatest amount of detail is given to the drapery and belt in front, establishing the front as the primary viewingside. The legs and boots, however,are evenlyfinished on all sides. In fact, the backs of the legs displayan extremelyhigh polish, suggestingthat the piece mayhave received occasional close viewing from behind. These features indicate that the statue is not likelyto have been set up in a closed architecturalcontext such as the columns on the Theater facade. No sign remains of an accompanying object resting on the plinth. At proper left, however,the plinth has an odd, lengthwise depression ca. 0.08 m in width and at least 0.20 m long (see Pls. 60:a, 61:a). The highly polished surface of the depression contrasts sharply with the point and claw-chiselwork on the right and rear of

175

the plinth. This area is too large to have supported a narrow object such as a spear or staff. If the figure held a long metal spear in the raised left arm, the spear tip would probably have been inserted into the base beside the plinth. A tree-trunk support, attached to the right leg continuously from the foot to midthigh, is separated from the leg by a heavy drill channel. The tree, of slightly twisted form, retains the stump of a tree limb near the top and a knot at the base. Flat-chisel work suggests the texture of the wood. A strut connects the lower legs, and a wedge supports the left heel (see P1. 61:a, b). Shadows of painted decoration are noticeable, especially in photographs taken at the time of excavation. Running spirals can be observed on the cross-straps, perhaps in yellow; some kind of decoration may appear in the central oval of the belt; and the darker and lighter sections of the skirt may reflect decorative patterns. Since these are preserved only as shadows rather than as pigment, samples could not be taken for analysis. Early Antonine.

One of the best-preserved sculptures from the Theater, this over life-size statue of a young woman in a chitoniskos and high boots adopts the chiastic, Polykleitan pose familiar from the Doryphoros.36 The arm positions would have continued the Polykleitan stance, putting the relaxed, straight right arm on the side of the tensed, straight leg, and the tensed, bent left arm on the side of the relaxed, bent leg. To complete the format the head would have faced proper right, in the direction of the supporting leg. A slight movement in the garment over the free leg calls attention to the walking pose. The squared proportions, even balance of weight, solidity, and Argive stance, with the free leg pulled behind the figure, are also suggestive of Polykleitan or Peloponnesian influence. Iconography.This statue does not adhere to a previously recognized statuary type. The absence of a similar statue with accompanying attributes and the loss of the head, the arms with the objects they carried, and objects affixed to the back prevent certainty in determining the subject. A number of possibilities have been considered. In 1929, the excavator, Shear, identified the sculpture as a copy of a 5th-century B.C. bronze representation of Artemis.37 In 1930, de Waele asserted that the statue was a copy of a bronze by the artist Strongylion, famous for statues of an Amazon euknemonand an Artemis Soteira in Megara.38The figure has been identified as Artemis in museum labels and catalogues since that time. In 1995, I presented such evidence as could be adduced to support three primary candidates for the subject-an Amazon, an Artemis, or a female victor-and also considered the possibility that the sculpture may have supported a portrait head.39 The evidence for each identification is largely circumstantial, as it consists of elements of costume, stance, and, to a certain extent, scale. The probability of its original location, at the east end of the Peristyle Court, and its Roman date later than the period of the major work in the Theater, should also be addressed, since a full consideration of the original locus and date is essential for situating the piece as fully as possible within its ancient context. Stance and Proportions.The stance and proportions give the impression that the statue is based on a Polykleitan model from the third quarter of the 5th century B.C.Despite the strong contrast, however, between the weight leg and the free leg and the corresponding difference between the raised left shoulder and the lowered right, the weight shift in the chiastic pose is not maintained 36. Cf. the version from the palaestra at Pompeii, now in Naples, Museo Nazionale 6011: Arias 1964, pls. 30, 31; Zanker 1974, pp. 7-9, pl. 5:1.

37. Shear 1929, pp. 534-536. 38. De Waele 1930, p. 54. 39. Sturgeon 1995.

176

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

waist is firmly horizontal, its plane emphasized by the wide belt. The evenly throughout-the lack of weight shift at the waist could be interpreted as an indication of an earlier model, a lingering stiffness in the model's otherwise advanced pose, or a regularization of the supposed model by the Roman carver. The importance of the belt to the subject may have had an impact on the pose, since such a wide belt may have appeared odd if set at an angle. The upper torso, however, does exhibit a slight turn to proper right, probably to coincide with the direction of the head as implied by the angle of the cutting for the tenon.40 The two profile views as well as the rear perspective confirm the impression gained from the front: the weight of the sculpture is equally balanced at the waist, despite the legs' unequal positions (Pls. 60:b, c; 61:a-c). This perhaps was intended to increase the figure's stability, which the carver further enhanced by enlarging the buttocks and connecting the tree-trunk support continuously to the right leg. Moreover, the balance of the statue with hips forward and shoulders set back, particularly observable from the sides, is the opposite of that found in true Polykleitan copies and seems intended to promote stability and to prevent the sculpture from falling forward. The figure's proportions may appear almost masculine at first, but the small, pointed breasts, short upper torso, and long legs belong to teenage girls. Notably, young girls on Attic grave reliefs are shown with cross-straps.41 Style.The drapery style seems designed to recall sculpture of the Classical period. Recent analysis of Classical-period drapery has produced a fairly refined chronology, but it is not likely that Roman carvers would have had as acute a sense of incremental variations as current scholarship attributes to progressive decades. Indeed, the variation of detail that is introduced into attested copies of specific Greek originals produces chastening effects on the modern observer. Nevertheless, Roman carvers used certain styles to achieve specific effects. Here, the effect resembles primarily that of the third quarter of the 5th century B.C. For example, the density and movement of the skirt are akin to some chitons on the Parthenon metopes and the Athena Parthenos shield, as known through the Peiraieus copies, suggesting a model of ca. 450-440 B.c.42A similar stance and lack of transparency or motion in the drapery are notable features in Parthenon frieze, West XII, but most of the Parthenon frieze garments demonstrate a greater revelation of the underlying body, as in the figure going right on South XXV.43 A minimal use of modeling lines also recalls the developmental stage of the Parthenon metopes and the Parthenos shield. Some lines, for instance, give definition to the breasts, while others flatten them. A few oblique lines in the skirt of the Corinth figure convey a slight suggestion of the abdominal curve and the forward direction of the upper left thigh; but the belt itself does not curve downward, so the kolpoifill out the slender torso without suggesting the roundness of the hips, features also appropriate to this period.44 The drapery is nuanced, however, by some later details. Long scratches, though not dominant, are noticeable over both breasts. Comparable scratches in drapery can be documented in copies of the Parthenos shield of 438 B.C., but scratches in Greek marble originals are not demonstrable until the Nemesis of Agorakritos, dated ca. 430 B.C., and the Nike Temple parapet of ca. 415 B.C. and later. In addition, ribbon folds, as seen over our upper torso, are discernible on figure C of the Parthenon west pediment, ca. 438-432 B.C., and later in the Nike Temple parapet.45 Closest 40. Cf. a cast of the Naples Doryphoros: Borbein 1973, p. 144, fig. 66, rear view. 41. For young girls on grave reliefs, see, e.g., Clairmont, CAT 1.883, and 3.453. 0.711,0.780, 1.267,1.280,1.431,1.814,1.862, 42. South 29: Brommer 1967, pls. 224, 225. Shield, from Peiraieus reliefs: Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1979, pls. 2, 3, 12. Cf. the Aphrodisias sarcophagus: Harrison 1981, pl. 48. 43. Brommer 1977, pls. 37, 144, 145:1. 44. Parthenon metope South 29 is comparable, while South 19 and North 32 exhibit a lesser degree of modeling; see

Brommer 1967, pls. 135,207. For shield copies, see StefanidouTiveriou 1979, nos. 1, 2, pls. 1-3. See also the discussion in Harrison 1988, esp. p. 101. 45. Shield: Stefanidou-Tiveriou1979, nos. 1, 2, pl. 3. Nemesis: Despinis 1971, pp. 26-27. Parapet:Carpenter 1929, pls. IV,VI:1-2, XV,XVIII:2,XX:1, XXII:1,XXIX:1;Harrison 1988, pp. 103-105. Parthenon west pediment C: Brommer 1963a, pl. 86. See also the discussion by Ridgway1981a, pp. 111-114, 222-224.

PERISTYLE COURT

177

to our figure with regard to the broken lines and twistedfolds is the Nike carryinga quiver from the Nike Temple parapet, dated before 413 B.C.46These features, in other words, are popular in

Greek drapery several decades later than the period suggested here by the pose, proportions, lack of transparency,or degree of motion in the drapery. Scratched lines and ribbon folds, however, are features that are popular in Roman workshops

producing classical statuary,and they probablyconstitutejust two of the Roman features of this statue. Also popular in the Roman period are the small kolpoi created where the cross-straps press the crinkly folds against the torso, with the resulting rich effect. The result is busier and richer and the fold lines are more discontinuous than is true with Greek figures wearing crossbands or exhibiting ribbon folds.47 Analogous effects of richness are a striking component of a number of Roman sculptures, for instance, the Flavian portrait of a young girl from Ostia in Rome.48 A marble copy of a bronze female statue from Cyrene displays even greater similarity to

the Corinth sculpture in its rich texturing and discontinuous fold lines.49Copies of the Mattei Amazon, in comparison with the Baiae casts taken from the bronze original, demonstrate the Roman interest in introducing variations of drapery detail as is seen here.50

The Greek iconographical tradition providesnumerous examples of the short, singleCostume. belted chiton, the quiver,and the tall boots worn by both Amazons and Artemis, but sculptural examples are limited and none stem from the period implied by the proportions, stance, and style of the Corinth piece. It should be stated at the outset that although the figure may at first call to mind one of the Ephesian Amazons, it seems unlikely that a 2nd-century A.C. Roman viewer would make this association, because the impressions are so different. Here there is no wound, no pathos, and all elements of costume are different from those of the Ephesian Ama-

zons, who are bare breasted as well as bare footed.51 Dress.On Greek vases the short, single-belted, sleeveless chiton is worn by a variety of figuresyoung girl dancers, young girl runners in religious contests, Atalanta as huntress, Andromeda in the categories of dancer, runner, hunter, traveler, and foreigner. Oriental dress-representing In sculpture, Artemis more commonly wears a longer garment-the double-belted chiton that

reaches to the knee. Manysculpturaltypes are known, and a number of these show the deity in a chitoniskos with boots, although none wears the short, single-belted garment with the crossstraps and tall boots.52 The recognition factor must have been of some importance in this period, so it is significant that Artemis is shown at Corinth on a Roman terracotta figurine, lamps, and coins in the standard recognizable huntress format, with double-belted chiton, single strap, short boots, and dog.53 Architectural sculptures from the late 5th and early 4th centuries B.C. provide examples of Amazons in chitoniskos, though without the belt. The best comparisons occur in copies of the Athena Parthenos shield, on the Bassai temple frieze of ca. 405-390, on the Delphi metope of ca. 380, and in the Epidauros west pediment of ca. 375-370. 46. Carpenter 1929, no. 5, pls. IV,VI:1;Harrison 1988, p. 104. 47. E.g., the "manneredsmallkolpoi"overthe belt of the Electra in Naples are pointed out by Ridgway1984, p. 86, pl. 36. Cf. also Nikai: Ridgway1981a, pp. 97-98, fig. 68; Carpenter 1929, pls. VIII,XI, XVII.Amazons,from Delphi: LIMCI,no. 100, s.v. Amazones(Devambez, Kauffmann-Samaras),ca. 400 B.c.; Marcade 1986,dated ca. 380 B.c.; from Epidauros(Athens,NM 136): LIMCI,pp. 613-614, no. 421a, s.v.Amazones(Devambez,Kauff;Yalouris1992,pp. 82-84, no. 34, pls. 40,41, 42:c. mann-Samaras) 48. Rome, Museo Nazionale 108518: Felletti Maj 1953, no. I, 1, no. 24;Wrede 1981, 119;Helbig4,III,no. 2195; MusNazRom, no. 83, pl. 10:2,4, A.D. 70-90; LIMCII,p. 802, no. 18, s.v.Artemis/ Diana (Simon), Flavian;Landwehr (1985, p. 72) affirms the Julio-Claudiandate. 49. Kane 1985.

50. Landwehr1985, pp. 64-66, 72-76, pls. 32-35. 51. See Plin. HN34.53; Ridgway1974; LIMCI, p. 625, nos. and 602-605, s.v. Amazones(Devambez, Kauffmann-Samaras); Sturgeon 1995, p. 498, notes 84, 85. 52. Cf. LIMCII, p. 637, no. 137; pp. 638-639, no. 163; pp. 640-641, no. 190; p. 645, no. 250; p. 654, no. 406; p. 691, no. 919, s.v.Artemis(Kahil);Bieber 1977, pls. 43-50, 56-61; Dohrn 1957, p. 58, pl. 2:b; and Knoll et al. 1993, no. 7. A statue of Artemisfrom the Hierapolis theater wears the cross-strap,but with double-beltedchiton, mantle, short boots, and leather-type belt (Hierapolis III, pp. 10-12, no. 4, pl. 6). 53. Figurine: CorinthIV,ii, p. 101, fig. 45:2;lamps:nos. 584, 585, fig. 46, pl. 26; coins: see, e.g., Imhoof-Blumerand Gardner [1885-1887] 1964, nos. 65-67, pl. D. For other figurines, see CorinthXII, p. 42, nos. 228-235, pl. 19; CorinthXV, ii, p. 124, no. XVII:17,pl. 25.

178

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

Female athletes form another category of sculptural figure shown wearing the short chiton. The few examples known, however, are either of uncertain subject and date, such as the Vatican Runner, or incomplete and therefore of uncertain subject, as the Berlin/Rome/Benevento type.54 The category of female athlete is appealing because of the long legs; the tradition of women's races, known at Corinth, Olympia, Sparta, and elsewhere; and Pausanias's statement (5.16.3) that girls had the right to set up their own victor statues. Our figure is significantly larger, however, than the Vatican Runner and the Berlin/Rome/Benevento type.55 The cross-straps are unusual in a sculpture of this type. Since a single strap would be worn to carry a quiver on the back, the double may provide a means of carrying a bow. On the other hand, the figure may be wearing a broad version of a loop, an accessory probably designed for keeping a garment from impeding activity and one commonly depicted in sculptures of young girls, athletes, or active figures.56 Since no trace is preserved of an object at the back of the Corinth figure, the function of the straps here is unclear. The figure wears tall, laced boots known as embades,appropriate to horse riders and travelers, as opposed to the boots that reach only to midcalf, the endromides,worn by runners.57 In the Greek period the distinction between these two boot types appears to be maintained, and Artemis wears the runners' boot, the Amazons, generally the riders'. In the Roman period, however, at least one relief of the 2nd century A.C. from Greece illustrates a figure that is probably Artemis but wears the tall boots, indicating that the type of boot by itself is not an indicator of subject for a statue of this period.58 The belt is the statue's most distinctive feature. A decorated object defined by sharp, vertically aligned points, it reproduces the traditional form of horse collar or breast strap (balteus), frequently featuring two sharp, central points and known from the 6th century B.C. through the Roman period. This form does not appear among sculptural depictions of Amazons or Artemis from the Classical period, but it is known from its sculptural representation on marble and bronze horses.59 The bronze horse from Cartoceto of "Nero Caesar," from the early Roman Imperial period, and the horse collar of the marble equestrian statue in the Weiller Collection in Paris display this shape and similar decoration.60 So, too, do examples of bronze belts from the 2nd century A.C. that, from their attached decoration, seem designed as a special form of parade armor.61The Corinth belt, therefore, seems to depict a metal horse trapping adapted to human usage for its value either as a mark of identification or of special ceremony. On other Roman statues generally of Greek type the belt also plays an important role as some sort of symbol.62 On the Corinth statue, the sharpness of the points appears to recall a metal shape, and so this belt is most likely an object designed for a special occasion rather than for daily use. The sharp ferom the st cenpoints here contrast with the more rounded points represented on two figures where a such as leather or A.C. soft material, felt, seems indicated.63 tury wearing military belts, 54. VaticanRunner:Lippold 1950, p. 134, pl. 47:4; Gardiner 1930,fig. 13, forAshmoleanMuseumcastwithoutrestoredarms; and Serwint1993, fig. 2. Berlin/Rome/Benevento type:Picard 1935-1963, II, pp. 661, 664, fig. 263; Steuben 1975. 55. VaticanRunner,H. 1.54 m; Berlingirl, rest.H. 1.60 m. 56. See Harrison1977, pp. 155-156, note 9, for girlson grave reliefs; and Sturgeon 1995, pp. 490-491, 493, figs. 8, 9. Many typesof figures displaysuch a criss-crossarrangementof straps, but it is not common among Amazons or Artemis. 57. See, e.g., Morrow 1985, pp. 65-69, 87-89, 137, 178 (embades);pp. 171-173, 178 (endromides).

58. Athens, Agora S-2361:LIMCII,p. 655, no. 414, s.v.Artemis (Kahil). 59. Cf.Archaicexamplesat Delphi:SiphnianTreasury,south frieze (Picardand de la Coste-Messieliere1927, pls. 9, 10), and Temple of Apollo (pl. 35); and Hellenistic example from the Pergamon Altar (LIMCIV,pp. 702-703, no. 371, s.v. Hera [A. Kossatz-Deissmann]). 60. On the horse from Cartoceto,see Nicosia, Maetzke,and

Borelli 1987; Pollini 1993, fig. 1. On the equestrian statue in Paris,see Bergemann 1990, no. P 44, pls. 4:b, 74:a, 75:b, mid1st century B.C., probably from Sentinum.

61. On the examples in Aosta, Brescia, and Vienna, see Carducci 1959, pls. 21-27; Bianchi Bandinelli 1971, pp. 121, 123, fig. 111. 62. See, for instance, female figures whose belt is tied in an obvious Herakles knot in relation to the Roman marriageceremony: Nicgorski 1995, pp. 50-53; Landwehr1993, pp. 92-94. Cf. the statue from the theater at Ferentum, now in Viterbo, in which two clasped right hands form the central belt device: Pensabene 1989, pp. 82-83, no. 11, pl. 77; Fuchs 1987, p. 94, no. E II 8, pl. 37:3, 7, identified as Polyhymnia(?)and associated with a hand holding a scroll. 63. See, e.g., the high-relieffigurefrom Nerva'sForum (Sturgeon 1995, pp. 496-497, note 76, fig. 13), and the Ethne of the Piroustae from the Sebasteion at Aphrodisias (Smith 1988b, pp. 59-62, no. 1, fig. 3, pl. 1).

PERISTYLE COURT

179

Overall, the costume of this statue contains a number of realistic aspects not found among depictions of heroic or mythological figures. The feet are fully covered with a practical sort of boot, not bare; the breasts are covered; and the belt is a specific shape, as if it were an important memento, prize, or insignia. The statue could therefore be read as a portrait of a young girl known for her victories in the footrace or her experience with horses. If so, the girl and her victories were commemorated with a straightforward Classical type of statue. The dedication

may have been inspired by the revivalof a Greek play or by the personal association of the subject with horse belt and a name that contains the root for horse, hipp- (irctr-). Scale. The original height of this statue, estimated at about 1.90 m, is over life-size and on a scale used for mythological and heroized figures. For instance, copies of the Doryphoros, possibly thought of in Roman times as a hero, are frequently at this size, as are copies of the Ephesian

Amazons; and portraits of deceased members of the imperial family,such as Gaius and Lucius Caesar,are also constructed at this height. At Corinth some statues of deities stand ca. 2.0 or 2.1 m tall. Date.A number of factors support an EarlyAntonine date for this piece, ca. A.D. 138-160. Comparison with the Amazons from the Canopus of Hadrian's Villa at Tivoli shows considerable

likeness, especially with regard to the animated movement and shifting directions of the folds, the discontinuous surface of the upper chiton, and the contrast of light and shadow.64The overall conception, however, is less fluid here, and our figure is marked in a number of areas by long,

continuous drill channels: separatingthe right leg from the tree trunk, defining majorfolds near the sides on the front of the skirt, and in some areas on the kolpoi. An analogous drill channel that sets off the support is but one similaritythat the statue of ZeusAigiochos from Cyrene, dated ca. A.D. 138, has with this figure.65 The Cyrene Zeus is strikingly close in pose and proportions, and it is possibly also similar in its underlying conception as a Roman Classical work.

In addition, the richlytextured surface of the upper chiton and the ridged folds pressed against

the upper torso find analogy in the bust of Faustina the Younger in the Museo Capitolino, dated A.D. 147-148.66 One of the Peiraieus reliefs, which copies the shield of Athena Parthenos and is dated to the EarlyAntonine period, exhibits similar deep, nearly straight drill channels cut through a chitoniskos.67 On the other hand, when compared with a female portrait in the Palazzo dei Conservatori, dated to the mid-Antonine period, the greater plasticity and variety achieved here

indicate that our statue is earlier.68Moreover,the manner of executing the skirt,particularlythe folds with flat outer surfaces,verticalrasping,and ridged, turned edges, is paralleledin two sculptures from the Temple of Poseidon at Isthmia. Notice should be taken of comparable rendering in the hanging folds of the chiton sleeve of the statue of Amphitrite69 and in Atalanta's skirt on

the relief associatedwith the base of the Isthmia group.70As both sculptures at Isthmia are dated to the EarlyAntonine period, the Corinth statue is likely to have been produced at that time. Location.Evidence provided by the statue, such as the comparable finish given to the back and front of the boots, the high polish afforded the back of the legs, and the fine detail on the front and the left side, suggests that this figure was intended to be placed not against an architectural facade, but in an area where it could be seen at close range. Further,although it is unlikely that the piece was meant to be viewed from the side or rear,the harmonious composition from threequarterleft view (see PI.60:a) suggests that this maybe a second primaryviewing angle, a circumstance also suggested for some other sculptures.71More indicative, however, is the lack of any breaks or chips of the sort that would be expected if the statue had fallen or if the facade had fallen on it, such as can be observed in most relief sculpture from the facade as well as in much of 64. Raeder 1983, nos. I 83, I 90, pl. 18; pp. 225-226, for discussion of the style of the TivoliAmazons. 65. Landwehr 1990, esp. p. 105, pl. 56. Cf. also Muthmann 1951, pp. 55, 138, H. 2.18 m. 66. Capitoline Museums, Stanza degli Imperatori 32, inv. 449: Fittschen and Zanker 1983, no. 19. 67. Stefanidou-Tiveriou1979, no. 20, pl. 16; for the date,

see p. 63. 68. Rome, Capitoline Museums, Museo Nuovo, Sala X34, inv. 203: Fittschen and Zanker 1983, no. 105. 69. IsthmiaIV,no. 17a;on chronology,see pp. 91-92, 98-99. 70. IsthmiaIV,no. 19b. 71. See Meyer 1986, esp. p. 26; and Fittschen 1991, esp. 273. p.

180

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

the freestanding sculpture found in front of it. The position in which our statue was found, facing the east wall of the Peristyle Court, suggests instead that it was rotated off its base, probably when the base was sought as building material during the late 4th century A.C. On the evidence of its findspot, it may have been set up in one of the intercolumniations of the east colonnade of the court, facing west. Mantle statue P1. 62:a, b S-3732. Theater, northeast corner of Peristyle Court, built into north wall of water tank, lying on left side facing north, 1929 (Corinth NB 322, pp. 822, 824, atJll). P.H. center of back of neck to top of plinth 1.76, W. at shoulder 0.510, W. waist 0.377, Th. at center of waist 0.346, H. navel to top of plinth 1.165; neck cavityW. 0.196, D. 0.240; r.joining surface: L. 0.120, W. 0.105; r. foot: L. 0.300, W. 0.120; rest. H. head to base of neck ca. 0.290.30, rest. H. 2.05 m.72 Two joining fragments, front part of right shoulder and torso; broken at left ankle, left side of plinth; missing head and both arms, which were each attached separately. Missing chips from preparedjoints, some drapery edges; heavy scratches over center of torso; encrustation and root marks throughout. A long micaceous vein mars the torso at right. Bibliography: Shear 1929, pp. 530-532, fig. 13, possibly a deified emperor; de Grazia 1973, p. 333, no. 109 (read S-3732 for T-380/Sc. 54), Antonine; Amedick 1987, p. 58, no. 10, Claudian. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. An over life-size male statue wearing a cloak fastened at the right shoulder and a large mantle draped around the right hip and over the left shoulder. The figure, whose head was made separately and inserted, stands on his right, unshod foot, the left pulled back. The right arm was held down, its place of attachment to the torso indicated by the base of a strut at the waist. The left arm, which was attached by means of a tenon and socketjoin, was held horizontally as if raised to lean on a spear. 68

The tree-trunk support, which adheres to the weight leg from the ankle to the top of the thigh, is marked by two small, projecting knots and regular, parallel ridges between the grooves, carved with a round-ended chisel. These ridges form a pleasing pattern that is mostly horizontal across the front but curves upward on the sides. Unlike the leg of the Amazon (67), this leg is not separated from the support by a drill channel, but the drapery emerges from the support, as if curving naturally from behind. The back of the statue is nearly flat, with major drapery sections barely indicated. Modeling of the torso is cold, the drapery very regularized. The deep cut between skin and drapery at left extends through to the back, unlike on 2. Light rasping remains over most draped surfaces. The torso is carefully smoothed in front, but heavy rasping marks the back of the right side of the chest. A high polish survives on the ankle, a recessed area protected from the elements. The neck cavity is worked with a point and a punch. The right armjoint, roughly prepared with the flat chisel for an adhesive, has partial anathyrosis, while the left arm joint is roughly tooled with a punch or a point. A large iron dowel (L. 0.060, W. 0.033 m) is preserved in the dowel cutting for the right arm, whereas an adhesive and possibly the support of a scepter or spear would have secured the left arm. A clamp cutting in the proper right face of the plinth indicates the means of securing the plinth to a base. The thick tree support and heavy hanging drapery contributed to its good state of preservation. Antonine.

This heroically draped statue wearing a large mantle and cloak stands in chiastic pose, with the weight on the right leg and the left leg pulled back. The left arm was raised, probably to hold a scepter or spear, while the right was held down by the side. The pose is bolder and more authoritative than that of theJulio-Claudian mantle statue from the Theater (2), as well as less classicizing. In contrast to the latter's vertical plane, this figure stands with hips forward and shoulders back. The solid proportions indicate a mature age, and the type is that of idealized imperial portraits in Niemeyer's category "Jupiter-Kostiim III." This type is employed for a number of statues of Claudius that are portrayed asJupiter, such as those from the Lanuvium theater in the Vatican Museums and from the Metroon in Olympia.73 The Corinth statue, however, lacks an attribute, such as an eagle beside the support or ribbons from a wreath, which would identify it as imperial. It is possible that emperors of the Flavian period and later could be represented in this format. The Jupiter symbolism would be understood from pose and costume without such symbols, as seems the case with the Copenhagen Domitian/Nerva from Nemi, but examples after Nerva are not securely identified.74 72. The head would be on the same scale as S-2505, of Hadrian or Aelius Caesar (died A.D. 138): Vermeule 1968, p. 249, fig. 142; pp. 263-264, as Aelius Caesar; de Grazia 1973, pp. 2728, 158-161, no. 30, as a posthumous Hadrian, possibly local work; Ridgway 1981b, p. 435. 73. Niemeyer 1968, pp. 107-108, nos. 95, 96.

74. Vatican Museums: Niemeyer 1968, no. 95, pl. 34:a. Olympia: Niemeyer 1968, p. 61, no. 96, pl. 34:b. Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 542: Niemeyer 1968, no. 99, pi. 35:2, reworked from a representation of Domitian; Poulsen 1974, no. 31, pl. 48. On the standingJupiter type, see Maderna 1988, pp. 18-19, nos.JS 1-JS 8, pls. 2-4.

PERISTYLE COURT

181

Unlike the drapery of the statues of Claudius and Domitian/Nervajust mentioned, a second garment is added here to the large mantle: a cloak (sagum or paludamentum) that is usually indicative of military activities.75 The paludamentum is normally worn alone by figures that are partially nude, like the statue of Antoninus Pius in Rome.76 Since the latter's arms are restored incorrectly, the portrait of the young Marcus Aurelius in Landsdowne House wearing only a paludamentum is a better example of the pose.77 The Corinth piece appears to reflect a misunderstanding of the drapery arrangement seen on the Claudius from Megara in Athens, where the cloak is pulled down to cross the upper chest.78 In the Corinthian example, rendering of both mantle and cloak is quite stiff, characterized by deep channels that create strong contrasts of light and shadow. For similarly strong contrasts, compare the Antonine Altar at Ephesos, especially the imperial figures, whose drapery also demonstrates strong upward movement from the weight leg to the opposite shoulder.79 Further, the strong channels running continuously through all overlapped hanging folds signal a return to two-dimensionality. The inclusion, however, of "press folds," rendered as shallow grooves, and the creased selvage, together with the polished surface denote a claim to elegance.80 Although Amedick has posited a Claudian date for the Corinth statue based on its style and support, the rendering of the drapery is quite unlike that of the statues of Claudius cited above with regard to fold patterns and depth and manner of carving.81 In addition, while the treatment of the tree trunk finds a good comparison in the Claudius in Olympia, it also compares well with a statue of "Lucius Verus" in Rome, for which an early-3rd-century A.C. date has been suggested. Thus, the rendering of the tree trunk does not appear to be diagnostic regarding chronology.82 The triangle in the cloak is awkward, as is the way it is pulled to the back. There is a triangular configuration in a cloak quite similar to the one here on a heroizing statue of a hunter from Kriekouki, near Mantinea, that is likened to Antinous.83 The bare feet suggest that this portrait was heroizing and set up posthumously. If likeness to the Ephesos altar can be taken as an indication, the statue could represent the emperor Antoninus Pius and might have been erected shortly after his death, March 7, A.D. 161, upon the establishment of the cult of Divus Antoninus. The sculpture would, then, provide further evidence of Roman imperial symbols in the Corinth Theater. The cloak was probably added in order to emphasize the figure's military character, although it functions additionally as a means of masking the joint of head to torso. Alternatively, the piece might depict a donor.84 The good state of preservation suggests that the statue was not set up at a great height, while the flat, undetailed back shows that it stood against a wall or in a niche. It was most likely displayed, therefore, in the Peristyle Court or East Theater Plaza, close to the place where it was found.85 Further, the shape of the plinth, of which the front and proper right faces are straight, 75. On Roman garments, see, e.g., Goldman 1994a, esp. pp. 228-233. 76. Rome, Museo Nazionale 8653: Niemeyer 1968, no. 116, pl. 42; Felletti Maj 1953, no. 204; Wegner 1939, pp. 141, 279; Helbig3, II, no. 1318. 77. Wegner 1939, p. 179, pl. 17:a. 78. Athens, NM 1759: Rhomiopoulou 1997, p. 41, no. 28; Maderna 1988, pp. 53-55, no. JV 2, one of several variants of the standingJupiter type. 79. Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum: Vermeule 1968, pp. 95-123, figs. 34-50, esp. fig. 42, slabs M, N; pp. 96-97, dated ca. A.D. 140; also Ganshow 1986; Liverani 1995, pp. 234-236; Oberleitner 1978, pp. 78-79, no. 61, fig. 58; Kleiner 1992, pp. 309-312. Dated ca. 160-169: Rosenbaum 1971, pp. 182-185; Eichler 1971, esp. pp. 131-134; Oberleitner 1978, pp. 92-93. For similar rendering of drapery, cf. also the Marcus Aurelius panels from the Arch of Constantine: Koeppel 1986, nos. 23-33. 80. For good examples of Roman "press folds" see the bronze Augustus from the Aegean (Touloupa 1986); the possible bronze Hadrian from near Adana in Istanbul, Archaeological

Museum 5311 (Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, no. 35); and the Clevelandbronze (Granger-Taylor1987). 81. Amedick 1987, p. 59, but see the review by Boschung (1989, p. 281).

82. LuciusVerus,VaticanMuseums,Salaa Croce Greca564: Wegner 1939, pl. 17:c;Helbig4,I, no. 17, possiblyearly3rd centuryA.C.See Muthmann1951, pp. 37-46, on Hadrianicto Early Antonine supports. 83. On the hunter from Kriekouki (Athens, NM 698), see Clairmont 1966, p. 59, no. 64; Datsouli-Stavridi 1980, pls. 20, 21, where described as of Peloponnesian marble. On Antinous as a hunter, see Meyer 1991, p. 164; see also p. 237 (on the Kriekouki statue) and pp. 251-253 (on the cult of Antinous in Mantinea). 84. On statues of emperors in theaters, see Niemeyer 1968, p. 33; Price 1984, pp. 109,135, 210-211; and Madema 1988, p. 54. 85. A coin of Constans I (A.D. 337-341) was found beneath the statue (coin 1929-10); this coin is consistent with the Theater's destruction date of ca. A.D. 375 deduced on other evidence (Williams and Zervos 1987, p. 31, and see above, p. 7).

182

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

and the use of a clamp to secure it to a base distinguish it from the sculptures restored with the Hadrianic assemblage on the stage and scaenae frons; they suggest that it is a separate dedication in the Theater complex. P1.62:c 69 Bull's head(?) S-974.Theater, PeristyleCourt, northeast colonnade, found when cleaning north end of tr.18d, 1910 (Corinth NB 65, p. 27). P.L.0.140, p.W. 0.128, p.Th. 0.050 m. Single fragment; head broken under the left eye, acrossmidnose, around the nostril, and through the left cheek. Surface somewhat chipped, discolored from weathering and root marks.

Marble,white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. The front lower segment of a large-scaledepiction of a bull. The sides of the face and mouth are softly modeled, the bridge of the nose bears broad horizontal striations, and the left nostrilis deeply cut. Hairis represented over the midnose in low-relief,comma-shapedcurls delineated sharplywith the edge of a flat chisel. The surfaces are carefullysmoothed. Roman.

The fragment may derive from a large sculpture of a bull or from a relief. There is no indication on the piece of a line or edge that would help determine the original format as a relief. The fragment is too large in scale to be associated with the sacrificialscene from the Herakles reliefs on the scaenae frons, and it is too sculptural in style to belong to a bucrania and garland

frieze, pieces of which were found in the "AthenaTrench" east of the Theater. There are no remains of a large-scale animal from the Peristyle Court with which this bull's head could be associated.86 Individualstatues of bulls are known, such as funeraryones from the late 4th century B.C. and the votive one with dedicatory inscription from the Nymphaeum of Herodes Atticus at Olympia. On the Olympia bull and the bull in the sacrificialscene on the Antonine Altar at Ephesos, the hair waves across the forehead and does not extend down the muzzle as it does here. Bulls occasionally serve as statue supports, as, for example, for a flute-playingsatyrfrom Rome, where it may be intended to suggest a rural setting; but the detail in the Corinth piece suggests that it comes from a full statue.87 P1.62:d 70 Two feet on trapezophoros base T-919/Sc. 72. Theater, southeast area of Peristyle Court, at H9, ca. 2.0 m above limestone pavement, near "Vibiuspit,"over destruction debris. Found close to the boar (T-22) of the Herakles reliefs (CorinthIX, ii, no. H13-1), 1929 (Corinth NB 322, p. 836). P.H. 0.261, p.W. 0.185, p.Th. 0.121, p.H. feet 0.031, p.L. foot 0.085, W.foot 0.047; H. base 0.230, H. top molding 0.071, H. lower molding 0.069 m. Single fragment;figure broken from bottom of heels to ankles; base broken away at proper left and back, broken vertically to left of left foot and behind feet. Surfaces of feet and front of base chipped, worn, weathered. Marble,white, fine grained; probablyPentelic.

Preserved is a tall, narrow base that supported a large marble statuette made in one piece with the base. The dimensions of the feet suggest that the figure was ca. 0.55 m in height (about life-size for a young child or onethird life-size for an adult).88 The statue and base together would therefore have been up to ca. 0.78 m tall. The base has a two-step molding on top and bottom composed of a fascia and a cyma reversa. The feet stand flat, the right, probably the weight leg, perpendicular to the front of the base, the left pointing to proper left. The feet are simply formed; the nails and toes are marked, but sketchily. No evidence of carved or painted sandals, drapery, or statue support survives. All surfaces are smoothed. There is no trace of an inscription. 2nd century A.C.

Bases of this format, carved in one piece with the statue, are relatively rare at Corinth. One other example (S-1029), found west of the Peirene Fountain, is of similar size and configuration, 86. Sacrificialscene: CorinthIX, ii, slab 8. The bucraniaand garland relief is unpublished. For a historicalrelief at Corinth that contains a sacrifice, see the reliefs from the arch on the Lechaion Road (Edwards1994). 87. Cf.the bull in Copenhagen,Ny CarlsbergGlyptotek1567, ca. 340 B.C., which also has horizontal ridges on the muzzle and hair that extends well down the muzzle, as here: Moltesen 1995, p. 77, no. 21. Olympia:Bol 1984, no. 1, pl. 2; the hair is more visible in the photograph in OlympiaIII, fig. 305, pl. 68:6. Ephesos:Oberleitner 1978, pp. 78, 80, no. 62, fig. 59, the fore-

head hair is thick and curly.For a reclining bull used as a statue support, cf. the satyrin Rome, Capitoline Museums, Galleria 12: StuartJones 1912-1926, I, p. 93, pl. 18; Helbig2,I, no. 441; Muthmann 1951, p. 79, fig. 34, pl. XV;and Clarac1841-1853, IV,no. 1670 C, pl. 710:B. 88. The estimatedheight wasdetermined from proportions of the marble statuettethe "LittleRefugee"from Asia Minorin Athens, NM 3485 (Karouzou1968, p. 185, pl. 67), which stands at 0.63 m.

PERISTYLE COURT

183

although its upper molding is a torus rather than a cyma reversa.89Separatelycarved statue bases of similar proportions and moldings exist from both the Hellenistic and Roman periods.90 Because so little of the figure is preserved, its original form is difficult to determine, but a few suggestions can be made. Given the find context in the PeristyleCourt attached to the Theater, the piece is likely to have been a votive or a furniture support. The figure could be that of a child or a woman with drapery hanging only at the back. Among children, girls are depicted draped with most of the feet covered by garments, so a boy would be more likely. The specific stance, with both feet flat on the ground and set somewhat widely apart, recalls the "LittleRefugee" in Athens, dated to the 1st century A.C.,which is draped and has a statue support beside one leg. A statuette of a nude boy from Pergamon provides a closer parallel. There the pillar support stands at our right, separate from the leg, and the figure leans on it while looking at his bird and some fruit. Similar, too, is a terracotta of a youth from Myrina that stands on a base of comparable height and proportions to ours.91 The piece may derive from a trapezophoros from which the support is broken at back and a

second figure is missing at proper left. Sculptures in the round similar to ours in size more commonly have the feet carved on a plinth set into a base, so a trapezophoros seems the better

suggestion. The feet may be placed so close to the proper right side of the base in order to provide sufficient space for a two-figured group. Trapezophoros supports of similar height and

with similar moldings can be seen at Argos, at Epidauros, and at Gortyn on Crete, and an example of similarheight but with more elaborate moldings comes from a base in Vienna dated ca. A.D. 140-150.92The findspot suggests that the Corinth piece was probablyset up in the Peristyle Court. 71

Base for statue of boy victor P1. 63:a 1-2433. Theater, Peristyle Court, on stylobate of east colonnade, in area described by the excavator as the "Vibius Pit," at H9, 1928 (Corinth NB 321, pp. 545, 568, 570-571). H. 1.028, W. top 0.515, Th. 0.477; shaft: H. 0.720, W. 0.392, Th. 0.390; H. moldings top 0.120, bottom 0.188; H. letters line 1 0.024, line 16 0.016 m. Single piece; molding broken at front (upper left) and back (upper right); base missing large section of rear right corner. The sides are worked with the claw chisel, the front has a recessed band at left and right. Weathered gray. Inscription on front. Traces of red paint were preserved in the letters when the base was found. Bibliography: Shear 1928b, p. 477; de Waele 1930, p. 54; Kent in CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 110-111, no. 272, pl. 21, dated 3rd century A.c.; Robert 1966, pp. 752-753, 1st or at beginning of 2nd century A.C.; BullEp 1967, no. 249; Jory 1967; Stefanis 1988, no. 2576, fig. 14; Moretti 1991, pp. 180-182, ca. A.D. 70-80; Rizakis 1995, p. 384, no. 719.

Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. Tall, narrow base for a bronze statue of a boy actor, identified as Lucius Vibius Florus in the inscription, line 1. Cuttings in the upper surface consist of two rough, shallow cuttings for the feet, squared at the toe (left: L. 0.190, W. 0.100, D. ca. 0.01; right: p.L. 0.140, W. 0.095 m); two deeper round cuttings (diam. 0.055, D. 0.050 m) for tenons to secure the feet in place; and a third round cutting in the center back of the upper surface (diam. 0.045, D. 0.025 m), 0.035 m from the rear edge, which would have secured an object. A rectangular cutting in the lower surface of the base would have served to fasten it onto the stylobate of the courtyard or a stepped base. The relationship among the feet emplacements, the tenons, and the base suggest the pose. The figure would have stood with its weight on the right foot, which was flat on the plinth with the tenon in the instep. The left foot was advanced, resting on the ball, where the tenon is located, with the heel angled proper left, the knee

89. S-1029 (unpublished): Pentelic marble, H. base 0.22, p.H. with tree 0.37 m. This piece comes from the left end of the base and supports a tree trunk with branch or snake wrapped around it. 90. SeeJacob-Felsch 1969, pp. 77, 90, note 285, for profiled rectangular base of Late Hellenistic date; Marcade 1969, no. A 350, pl. 21, base of Priapos herm; and no. E 158, pl. 74, base for statue of Ptolemy Euergetes, which is large and made in sections. Profiled bases of the Roman period are often more sketchily worked, as in some marble trapezophoroi; see Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1985, nos. 4-6, 9, or 1 and 10, which are more carefully formed. For an ash altar in Rome with comparable bases in relief supporting griffins, see Andreae 1998, p. 22*,

pl. 239, dated to the first half of the 2nd century A.C. 91. For children, see, e.g., Ruhfel 1984, esp. fig. 109; Karouzou 1968, p. 185, pl. 67, "Little Refugee," Athens, NM 3485. Pergamon: AvPVII, ii, no. 200. Myrina: Winter 1903, II, p. 255, fig. 7. 92. Argos: Marcade and Raftopoulou 1963, pp. 165-170, no. 166. Epidauros: Katakis 2002, pp. 125-126, no. 138, an Eros. Gortyn: Romeo and Portale 1998, pp. 176-177, no. 47, pl. 17:d, also broken at the ankles but preserving the feet of both figures, identified as Dionysos and a satyr. Vienna, from Athens: Stefanidou-Tiveriou 1993, no. 75, with satyr and maenad, in which the base has an extra half-round at top and bottom and the support contains a two-figured group interacting closely.

184

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

inward. There is no sign of drapery abutting the plinth, so the statue may have been nude, semidraped, or dressed in an actor's costume.93 The third cutting at the back of the base may have held a tenon to secure a small support, the end of a mantle, or an attribute.94 The top surface of the plinth is rough with point marks, so it

probably was not intended to be seen. The dowel cutting in the bottom of the base, therefore, may indicate that the present base was set up on an additional one- or two-steppedbase in order to elevate the monument. Ca. A.D. 80.

The form of the base-a tall, narrow shaft crowned with a two-stepped molding-is a taller version of a type of statue base known from Hellenistic times. The statue base would have raised the statue to an easier viewing level, employing a practice known from Hellenistic times.95 Although a number of statue bases with vertical shafts are known from Roman Corinth, most are without crowning moldings. Kent includes among these three others with crowning moldings, one from the mid-Augustan period and two from the mid-2nd century A.C. The molding of Kent's no. 264 is most like ours, but the letters of the inscription are larger and more regular.96 The size and proportions of our statue base, the general type of moldings at top and bottom, and the cuttings for a bronze statue are similar to those of a statue base from Kleonai with a Greek text honoring Cornelius Vetourius Theophilus.97 The cuttings on the Kleonai base, which are well preserved, comprise two shallow feet emplacements, both flat on the base, and round dowel cuttings by the arch of each foot to secure the sculpture to the base.98The foot cuttings are squared at the toe and heel, as the cuttings preserved on the Vibius base. If the cuttings for the feet are only slightly larger than the feet that rested on them, the statue made for the Kleonai base was over life-size. Comparison with the Kleonai base, which is only 0.035 m wider than that of Vibius, shows that bases of this size could be used to support statues of varying heights and may indicate that bases with comparable moldings may have had a certain size in a certain period. On the Vibius base, the right foot emplacement cutting was probably 0.285 m long, the foot possibly 0.275 m, based on comparison with the base from Kleonai. To estimate the height of the statue from the Vibius base, Corinth S-1065, the Classical-style statue of "Gaius" Caesar (H. 1.98 m), provides a good comparison: the length of its right, weight-bearing foot is 0.310 m and the inner distance between the feet is ca. 0.215 m (0.175 m on the Vibius base). If the bronze sculpture of Vibius depicted a youth in his early to mid-teens following Classical proportions, it would have stood about 1.60-1.75 m tall. The statue was set up by the boy's father (lines 13-15), on the vote of the city council (line 16). The victories celebrated by the monument include those at the Argive Heraia, in the Corinthian Caesarea, at the Sikyonian Caesarea, at the Epidaurian Asklepieia, and in open competitions at each site (lines 3-12). Robert and Moretti have suggested that the honoree was a young actor rather than a boy singer, as suggested by Kent.99Kent had dated the monument to the 3rd cen93. For a figure in a pose that may be similarto the missing figure here, see an unfinished statue of a nude athlete crowning himself, Athens, NM 1662 (Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 84). For depictions of Roman actorsand victors,cf. the gravemonument in Thessaloniki (Thessaloniki I, no. 140), dated ca. A.D.

170-200, and the relief of Korneliosfound at Isthmia(Lattimore in IsthmiaVI, pp. 34-37, no. 87), mid-2nd century A.C., probably a posthumous honorific stele. 94. For a standing figure with mantle and support between his feet, see the colossal Dionysos from the Palatine in Parma: Kleiner 1992, p. 183, fig. 151;Belli Pasqua1995, pp. 89-90, no. 37, late 1st century A.C. For a standing figure with attributein this position, see the young satyrin NewYork:Belli Pasqua1995, p. 91, no. 38, 1st century A.C. 95. Cf. the bronze Artemis and deer in Buffalo, AlbrightKnox Art Gallery,in which the small figure is supported by a base of similarproportionsto ours;see Mattusch1996, pp. 274281, no. 35, H. Artemis 0.92, H. base 0.318 m. 96. For rectangularstatue bases from Hellenistic times, see Jacob-Felsch1969,p. 90; Schmidt1995,pp. 340-341, no. IV.1.76, fig. 212, Delos, 102/1 B.c.; p. 362, no. IV.1.111,fig. 213, Delos,

96/5 B.c.; and p. 274, no. II.10, fig. 237, Lindos, ca. 213 B.C., with similarupper molding. For baseswith plain tops, see, e.g., CorinthVIII, iii, nos. 116,117,132,135,137,140,147,150,152, 160, 269, 270; with crowning moldings, nos. 151, 226, 264. 97. CorinthI, no. 873; IG IV 490; H. 1.01, W. 0.55, Th. 0.43 m, the upper surface carefullydressed with a claw chisel. On statuebases,see the plate inJacob-Felsch1969for typesof statue bases;and Schmidt 1995. 98. Cuttingsfor feet: L. 0.310,W.0.095, D. ca. 0.005 m. Dowel cuttings:diam. 0.075, D. 0.050 m. 99. Robert 1966, pp. 752-753; Moretti 1991;Kent in Corinth VIII,iii, p. 110. The imposing stele of L. KorneliosKorinthios, found reused in the northeast gate of the Hexamilion fortification at Isthmia, erected by his sons, depicts wreaths to call attention to his many victories;see IsthmiaVI, pp. 34-37, no. 87, pls. 29, 30, where dated to the mid-2nd century A.C. and proposed to be a posthumous honorific stele; Moretti (1991, p. 185) places it ca. A.D. 85. Another Corinthian,FabiusActiacus, is recorded as winning a victoryin flute-playingat the festivalof the Muses held at Thespiai in the late 2nd centuryA.c.; see IG VII 1773, line 18; and Robert 1946.

PERISTYLE COURT

185

turyA.C.on the basis of letter forms and their irregularplacement, but Moretti has convincingly argued for a date of ca. A.D. 70-80, to correspond with the time when the name of the Argive festival changed.100Vibius's statue may have stood in the eastern part of the Peristyle Court, near

its findspot, where it was discarded after the bronze sculpture was pried off the base. 72

Victor stele or base(?)

P1. 63

72A Fragment of inscribed base or stele P1. 63:b 1-361. Theater, excavations in the central stage building, 1903. P.H. 0.111, p.W. 0.056, p.Th. 0.026, H. prize crown 0.082, H. letters 0.009 m. Bibliography: CorinthVIII, i, p. 145, no. 260. 72A is a small segment from the top edge and upper section of the stele, on which about half of an inscribed object in relief survives. P1. 63:c 72B Fragment of inscribed base or stele 1-2319a, b. Theater, western scaenae frons, at H. of 3.5 m, or about the level of the second course of the east hospitalium, 1928 (Corinth NB 322, p. 528). P.H. 0.242, p.W. 0.195, max. H. prize crown 0.087, H. letters 1. crown 0.015, H. letter on molding 0.030 m. Bibliography: CorinthVIII, iii, p. 170, no. 513, pl. 44, ca. A.D. 300; Robert 1966, p. 760. 72B contains part of the top edge, the upper section with most of two inscribed objects in relief, molding, and a small portion of an inscribed text. P1. 63:d 72C Fragment of inscribed base or stele 1-2320. Theater, found with 72B. P.H. 0.265, p.W. 0.176, p.Th. 0.114, H. prize crown 0.085, H. letters line 1 0.030; H. letters on crown 0.010 m. Bibliography: see 72B. 72C provides part of the top edge, most of an inscribed object in relief, molding, and a small portion of an inscribed text. P1. 63:e 72D Fragments of inscribed base or stele I-2425/unnumbered Theater, fragment. probably from Shear's excavations; may belong with an unnumbered lost fragment with no inscription drawn by de

Waele (Corinth NB 321, p. 528), which he thought came from the same monument. P.H. 0.300, p.W. 0.285, Th. of stele 0.130; H. letters 0.030, 0.017 m. 72D preserves a portion of the top and left edges of the stele. The front surface of the upper section, which contains reliefs on 72A-C, is completely missing. Parts of two rows of letters survive from the upper left corner of an inscribed section. 72A-D: Five nonjoining pieces. Weathered. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. These fragments are associated because they are of similar material and dimensions and contain similar reliefs. They appear to derive from a stele that was broken up intentionally, for the moldings and reliefs were chipped away in order to produce a block that could be reused in building. The upper part of the stele contained a row of "prize crowns" set over a two-stage molding. Below the molding is the beginning of a Greek inscription with its first line partially preserved on D (left), and C (right). The upper surface of the monument is roughly picked, the sides (preserved on D and C) finished with a claw chisel, except for the smoothed edges at top and front. Parts of four relief objects that resemble baskets remain, with inscriptions on a central, recessed zone bounded by cable patterns: A iv Aa. ... ,B [iv fI]?pyo?tco [zp6[v] and iv Ilepyaio [tep6v], C N?Lxo.i8s?LaC[v].101 On the lower molding of B is TY. On C beneath the two-stepped molding at the top of the shaft is ON. Kent thought B and C came from a base and restored ['Aya6xO] T6[~)] on the lower molding, the spacing of the letters leading him to restore nine inscribed objects across the top.102

2nd to 3rd century A.c.

The objects shown in relief resemble prize crowns given for victories in certain local games in Roman Greece and Asia Minor. Prize crowns, which are open at the top and bottom, generally have diagonal incised decoration and central recessed bands inscribed with the name of the city or honoree of the games, as here. Such crowns are depicted on a number of objects from Asia Minor of the 2nd and 3rd centuries A.C., including funerary reliefs, architectural reliefs, and coins. A few examples show a prize crown held over a victor's head, which indicates that the basketlike objects represent crowns.103A funerary relief from Mytilene contains three prize crowns across the top with palm branches between them, the victory palms supporting the interpretation of the basketlike objects as victory crowns. Beneath a raised groundline, a naked youth is 100. Kent in CorinthVIII, iii, pp. 110-111, no. 272; Moretti

1991, pp. 180-182. 101. Meritt provided the reading of A in CorinthVIII, i, p. 145, no. 260; Kent restored B and C in CorinthVIII, iii, p. 170, no. 513. 102. Kent in CorinthVIII, iii, p. 170, no. 513. A notation in the Inscription Inventory Notebook shows that Walbank had anticipated my association between 1-361 and I-2319a, b/2320

in 1977. 103. See, e.g, the inscription CILXV 7045 in a scene painted on a glass vase, and a coin from Hierapolis (BMC 25, p. 239, no. 71). See Weiss 1981, pp. 326-327, note 40, for discussion of these objects as prize crowns versus prize cylinders. For an extensive treatment of prize crowns, see Rumscheid 2000, pp. 7989, 179-195.

186

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

shown running, holding a palm branch. The inscription beneath the relief names the deceased, Aneiketos Aneiketou, and identifies him as three times dolichodromos,winning twice in the Pergamene Asklepieia and once in the Theateira Tyrimneia at Delphi, and also as competing at Actium. The prize crowns on Aneiketos's stele resemble ours in their position across the heading

of the monument. Moreover, because the Mytilene stele is complete, preserving the heading reliefs and central relief as well as the inscription, it demonstrates a connection between the reliefs in the heading and the entire monument: the prize crowns symbolize the accomplishment of the deceased that is being emphasized. Pfuhl and M6bius date the stele to the 2nd century A.C.104

Prize crowns are prominently displayedin relief over the porta regia of the Severan theater at and in the coffer reliefs from the Nymphaeum at Side.106Rittiargues that the games Hierapolis105 are exalted by the central placement of the Hierapolis relief, which has a large metal prize crown on a table. The unusual size of the Hierapolis crown, as well as its location beside depictions of the imperial familyand possible personifications ofAgon, Agonothesia, and Hierapolis, suggests that it symbolizes the city's agonistic activities.A separate relief from the Hierapolis orchestra repeats the prize crown as a major element. A prize crown was also found on a coffer inscribed HIIf6tnear the Temple of Apollo; at Selge several large crowns are raised in relief 'A-7oX[XCvs]L]xa on an athlete's tomb; and a number of cities of Thrace and Asia Minor depict prize crowns in their coinage.107The use of the basketlike object as a prize crown appears to be a widespread practice in Thrace and Asia Minor, where the cities named in the Corinth monument are located. Several fragments found in the Athenian Agora depict in relief one or more large prize crowns, analogous to those pictured at Side, Hierapolis, and Corinth.108 The monument from the Corinth Theater is flat and most like the funeraryrelief of Aneiketos from Mytilene in format. It is probably from a different type of relief, however,because of the large, well-formedmoldings. The restored dedication to Agathe Tyche at the top is the evidence that our piece is a dedication. The row of prize crowns indicates that it was an inscribed victory monument. The findspots of various segments on the back side of the scaenae frons suggest that

it was set up along the north wall of the scaenae frons, facing the open Peristyle Court. Depictions of prize crowns like these in Asia Minor suggest a date in the 2nd to 3rd century A.C. 73

Miniature bust of Antoninus Pius(?) P1. 64 T-1047/Sc. 79. Theater, in passage between East Theater Plaza and Peristyle Court in north-south drain, south of steps, 0.2 m below pavement level, 1929 (Corinth NB 324, p. 874, atJ10). H. 0.142, H. bust 0.103, H. head 0.055, W. shoulders 0.078, Th. chest 0.038, W. base 0.050 m. Single fragment, intact. Surfaces worn and smoothed, especially the outer edges of the brow, nose, and arms; grayed from exposure to burning. Traces of red paint on the hair, nose, and chest, and of gilding on hair, beard, and above upper lip.

Bibliography:Shear 1929, p. 532, fig. 14. Stolen April 12, 1990, IFARReports11:6, no. 681, with photo. RecoveredJanuary 25, 2001. Marble,white, fine to medium grained. Miniature, undraped bust of a bearded man, supported by a roughly rectangularbase. The bust extends nearly to the waist in front and back, the arms to midbiceps. The left shoulder is higher and more rounded than the right; the head is turned slightlyto proper left. The hair radiatesfrom a centralpoint in back and frames the face with thick, tuftlike locks. A sharp crease encircling the head maymarkthe position of a fillet or a means

104.Pfuhl-M6bius I, no. 107;see alsoRumscheid2000,no. 169. 105. HierapolisI, pp. 59, 60, 62, the theater dated A.D. 205210; pls. l:b, 2:a, relief over porta regia. 106. Mansel1963,p. 55, figs.39,40. A prizecrownis shownon each coffer relief, the firstdecoratedwith flowersand inscribed ezp6oon the centralband; the second, undecorated,with oixouj[vtx6q and with palm branches and a pomegranate sticking out from the upper opening. Mansel dated the building to the Antonine period (1963, p. 64), but Weiss (1981, pp. 341-343, pls. 25:2, 26) associatesit with the contest begun by GordianIII. 107. HierapolisI, pp. 75-76, pl. 7:a, for orchestra relief; pp. 80-82, pl. 7:b, for coffer with discussion of bibliography and date; pp. 93-94, pl. 9:b, for Selge tomb. For the inscriptions from the Hierapolis theater,see SEGXXXV1368-1375. Coins:

BMC25, p. 317, no. 230; p. 321, no. 249, pl. 38:4; HierapolisI, p. 92; Weiss 1981, pp. 344-346, pl. 27; Ziegler 1985, pls. 1-9. The Side monument is interpreted as a bema on which artists performed dramaticcontests, dated A.D. 251: Weiss 1981, esp. pp. 326-331; SEGXXXI 1288. Cf. also the altar in Ishekli in central Phrygia (Buckler et al. 1926, no. 204, pl. 12:c); similar prize crownson mosaicsfrom the Bathsin Aquileia (SEGXXXI 848), from Althiburos for the Asklepieia in Carthage (SEG XXXII 1089), from Aquileia (SEGXL813), and on the epitaph of a boxer, from Cyrene (SEGXL 1599). 108. Meritt1948, pp. 43-44, pls. 15-18. I thank M.Walbank for bringing the Agora fragmentsto my attention. On the agonistic bema from Side, see Weiss 1981, pp. 326-329, 330-331, pl. 19.

PERISTYLE COURT

of securing gilding. The locks divide over the right side of the browand lie diagonallyover the center part of the forehead. The head hair is more sharply defined than the beard, but moustache and beard resemble the head hair in volume, and some locks of the beard twist and curl at the ends. Both hair and beard thicken at the sides with the effect of shortening the overallproportions.The straight-sidedface presents a rectangular forehead of medium height. The left eyebrow has a high ridge, the eyes are sketchilyrendered, the cheekbones emphasized,

187

and the lips somewhatirregular.The juncture of neck to shoulders is sharply creased. The forward bend of the shoulders and the crease under the pectorals call attention to the subject'sadvanced years. Some of the sharp creases may have helped anchor the gilding. The base is smoothly finished, the straightsides sloping graduallyoutward toward the bottom on the front and back, and inwardon the sides. Antonine.

This small portrait bust is the most complete and most enigmatic sculpture from the Corinth Theater. Despite its sketchy treatment, the elimination of tool marks and the presence of red paint and gold leaf indicate that it is finished and it was gilded. The base may be simplified because of the small size, but it is unusual for a base supporting a bust to have no moldings, even a bust of miniature scale, for the base acts as a horizontal decorative element as well as a functional support. Miniature busts with molded bases occur in various media, such as the bronze busts from the Villa of the Papyri, the terracotta bust of a priestess from Asia Minor, and marble busts of Chrysippos in Athens and of Septimius Severus in Augusta Emerita.109 Jucker has called attention to a number of Roman busts of Greek origin that have simplified bases.110The small busts found on Hermes Street in Athens, dated to the 3rd century A.C., have unfinished bases divided into two horizontal sections.11' Simple shapes of bases are found in large and small Greek busts.112Our base is distinct in height and smooth finish. A small bust of Serapis from the Athenian Agora has a base that is also of irregular shape and smooth finish."13 The form of the base may help determine the use of the bust. One possibility is that it was made to be an insert. The flat sides and near rectangular shape seem appropriate in size, shape, and finish to some sockets, shaped as inverted truncated cones with flat bottoms, that were used injoining sections of marble statuary. Socket and tenon marblejoins show a variety of sculptural uses.114The nearly rectangular shape of the Corinth bust, which narrows gradually toward the bottom, also recalls the shape of plugs or empolion cuttings used in architecture."5 109. Villa of the Papyri:Zenon (Naples, Museo Nazionale 5468:Richter 1965, II, p. 188, no. 2, figs. 1086-1088), Epikouros (Naples, Museo Nazionale 5465: Richter 1965, II, p. 196, no. 8, figs. 1175-1177), Hermarchos (Naples, Museo Nazionale 5466: Richter 1965, II, p. 204, no. 10, figs. 1291-1293), Demosthenes (Naples, Museo Nazionale 5467: Richter 1965, II, p. 217, no. 12, figs. 1438-1440). Terracottabust: Inan and Alfoldi-Rosenbaum 1979, pp. 42-44, pl. 273:2. Chrysippos:Athens, NM 3469, Richter1965, II, pp. 192-193, no. 16, fig. 1146, H. 0.15 m, round base with simple moldings. SeptimiusSeverus:Garciay Bellido 1949, no. 28, pl. 25. 110. Cf. the bust on a sarcophagusin Tarragona:Jucker 1961, p. 46, note 4, no. S 21, and p. 98; Garciay Bellido 1949, no. 274, pls. 226-228; and the Hippokratesin Ostia: OstiaV,no. 6, pl. 4. 111. Daux 1961, p. 613, pls. 19-23; Threpsiades 1962, pls. 18-20, dated 3rd century A.c.; Richter 1965, I, p. 115, no. 27 (Socrates), fig. 523, found in a sculptor'sworkroom;II, p. 168, no. 5 (Plato[?]), fig. 965. Richter thought these busts represented a workshopnear where they were found; Trianti (2002, p. 161) thinks this is very possible. 112. For simple baseswith moldings, see examples inJucker 1961: no. St 42, pl. 37, male bust from Gortyn in Heraklion (inv. 60), A.D. 160-180; no. St 49, pl. 41, female bust from Athens (AgoraS-1044);no. St 43, pl. 37, bustof MarcusAureliusfrom Cyrene,now in London (BM1464);and no. St 45, pl. 38, female bustfrom the Peiraieus,A.D. 164, now in Paris(LouvreMa3068). For examples with no moldings, see bust of Theon from Ephesos, in Rome, Capitoline Museums (StuartJones 1912-

1926, I, p. 229, no. 25, pl. 57; Richter 1965, III,p. 285, fig. 2038, 115-140); of Pythodorisfrom Smyrna,in Rome, Capitoline Museums (Richter 1965, III, p. 288, fig. 2054); of Polemon in Athens, NM 427 (Richter 1965, III, p. 285, figs. 2034-2037; Datsouli-Stavridi 1985, pp. 46-47, pls. 44, 45, ca. A.D. 140; Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 73); of Publius from Cyrene in London, BM 2273, Trajanic(Rosenbaum 1960, no. 202); and on grave altarfrom Beroia, Hadrianic (Rfisch 1969, pp. 143-144, no. R 3, fig. 71). On small-scalesculpture, see Bartman1992, esp. p. 42. 113. Agora S-355:Shear 1935, pp. 397-398, fig. 24. 114. For the Antoninus Pius from Sardis,the two sections of the head joined, see Hanfmann and Ramage 1978, no. 79. Cf. also the black wig that was attached to a female portraitin Rome by a socket and tenon (ca. A.D. 160-180), Rome, Capitoline Museums, Stanzadegli Imperatori43, inv. 469 (Fittschen and Zanker 1983, no. 113). In the Rome portrait the tenon, socket, and abutting surfaces are scored with chisel marks to give purchase to the adhesive.Although few actual marble tenons survive,their shapes can be deduced from the form of the sockets prepared to receive them, as between a head and torso; cf. Claridge1990, p. 143, fig. 8:c;for a nude torso, see London, BM 1065 (Waywell1978, no. 85, pl. 27). See also Adam 1966, p. 48, on plugs. 115. Orlandos 1955-1956, p. 193, figs. 146-148, empolion cuttingsfrom the Propylaia,Erechtheion,and from the Temple of Poseidon at Sounion; see also pp. 190, 192-195, on gomphoi (pegs, pins, wedges). A.D.

188

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

Another possible use for our bust is as a dedication inserted onto an offering table or altar. Rows of heads appear on two Greek monuments that have been interpreted as altars. A slab from Dilophos in Thessaly, restored as the top of an altar, has a row of six female heads, and two

multiple herms from Tegea contain rows of heads."16Of possibly related function are the "busts of the imperial family" that are displayed on an altar on a coin from Lugdunum."17By analogy, it seems possible that the Corinth bust may have been a dedication for an altar, either singly or as

part of a series. The form of the base suggests it may have been an imago,for it is similar to bases of statuettes of the Lares Augusti and the Genius of Claudius on the Altar of the Vicomagistri in Rome.8 These statuettes, held on extended palms, have bases that are identical to the Corinth base in

shape and lack of molded decoration. Their shapes appear to facilitate their being carried or displayed. A relief in the Villa Medici illustratesa similar statuette, held by its plain base.l19Soldiers are depicted carryingsmall busts of the emperor, as on Genialis'sgravestone in Mainz and a tomb from Avellino.120On a sardonyxcameo in Vienna, an enthroned Liviaholds a bust of the deified Augustus (without a base) "asif she were his priestess."'21 Soldiers are described by literary sources as carrying imagineson campaign among the standards. The term imago is used for both imperial and nonimperial images, as sources refer to imaginesof both Tiberius and Sejanus, and Marcus Aurelius is said to have kept golden statues of his teachers in his lararium.122Statuettes of various subjects have been found in or near lararia in Pompeii and Herculaneum.123 It is possible that imperial busts depicted on grave stelai such as

those in Mainzand Avellino depict imagines.l24The Corinth bust may therefore represent a small votive, an interpretation that seems appropriate for its size and its base. Shear does not suggest an identification of our bust, but he compares portraitsof Hadrian and notes that coins found nearby do not date later than the Hadrianic period.125The length of the bust and the thickness of the beard indicate, rather, a date in the middle third of the 2nd century A.C.126The sketchy rendering of the Corinth piece makes determination of the subject difficult. Recognition would seem important for a miniature votive, especially a gilded one.127Miniature imperial portraits in precious metals are not always easy to identify, as the silver busts in Mainz illustrate.128The interpretation of such figures is often complicated by their provincial nature and by lack of local comparisons. The subject, as suggested by analogies to the base discussed above and by the gilding, seems likely to be an object of veneration. The head does not resemble the heads of specific deities, such as Zeus/Jupiter or Poseidon/Neptune. Contrast, for instance, the small bearded divine heads on the relief cylinder from Gabii, which is possibly of Hadrianic date.129 116. Miller 1974, esp. p. 242, note 38; Long (1987, p. 205) doubts the reconstruction. On Tegea, see Long 1987, p. 40, nos. Tegea 1, 2, figs. 106, 107. 117. Zanker 1988, pp. 302-303, fig. 236; Fishwick1978, p. 1205, pl. I, same coin, objects on altar described as "unidentified";Hanlein-Schafer1985, p. 249, pl. 65:b, objects described as unidentifiable. 118. Ryberg 1955, pp. 75-80, pls. 33, 34; Kunckel 1974; Anderson 1984; Kleiner 1992, p. 147, fig. 122. On the imago, see, e.g., DarSagIIIA,pp. 389-415, s.v.imago,esp. pp. 408,414415; Daut 1975; and Fishwick1991, pp. 532-540. 119. Ryberg1955, p. 80, fig. 35:d, pl. 20; Koeppel 1983, no. 15, fig. 20 (Claudian). For imperial images depicted on coins, see, e.g., Price 1984, pp. 190-191. 120. Mainz:Selzer 1988, no. 85, fig. 27 (color), dated second half of 1st century A.C., the bust has no base;Jucker 1961, p. 122, note 16.Avellino,Tomb ofM. PacciusMarcellus:Schafer 1989, pp. 292-304, no. 27, pls. 47:2, 49:3. 121. Vienna, KunsthistorischesMuseum IX A 95, the bust veiled and draped: Zanker 1988, pp. 234-235, fig. 184.

122. On use of imaginesor effigies by the military,see, e.g., Suet. Tib.48.2; 65; Tac. Ann. 4.2.4, 12.17.3; M. Aur. Med.3.5, though the shape, full figure or bust, is unspecified. See also Scott 1931; Daut 1975. 123. Boyce 1937, pp. 106-107; Orr 1972. 124. On the possibleassociationbetween the term imagoand the bustsdepicted on gravestelai,see Daut 1975,pp. 42-54, 143. 125. Shear 1929, p. 532; found with coins of Nero, Galba, Vespasian,Trajan,and Hadrian. 126. As comparisons for bust length and beard thickness, see Athens NM 417 (Rhomiopoulou 1997, p. 79, no. 79; Meyer 1991, no. I 7, pl. 5, Late Hadrianic); Paris, Louvre, Ma 313 (Meyer1991,no. 142); CapitolineMuseums,Stanzadegli Imperatori 26, inv. 446 (Fittschen and Zanker 1985, no. 59, pl. 67, Antoninus Pius, ca. A.D. 140). The Cologne bust (R6mischGermanischesMuseum49.6), dated A.D. 132-133, is of comparable length; see Bracker1968, p. 80. 127. Bartman1992, pp. 14-15. 128. Kunzl 1982, figs. 76-79. 129. Long 1987, pp. 294-296, no. Gabii 1, figs. 46-48.

NORTH OF EAST PARODOS AND EAST THEATER PLAZA

189

Gilding is not an imperial prerogative, since it is used from the period of Augustus to the 5th century A.C., in Italy and the provinces,

for men of senatorial

rank, benefactors,

and tutors, as

well as for emperors.130 Gilding was a means of adding to the honors paid the subject and of likening the person to a god. Comparisons for the base, however, indicate an imperial subject. The small, sketchily worked busts of emperors on priest crowns are generally draped. A few of

these have no indication of drapery, such as those on the bronze crown from Ephesos, so the lack of drapery is not a determining factor.131Our bust has no means to attach an attribute, so identification would rely on the features. Riccardi has called attention to the common deviation from canonical imperial portrait types, especially in the eastern Roman provinces, which is referred to

in literary sources from the 2nd century A.C., for example, Arrian and Fronto.132Indeed, the wide range of verisimilitude in imperial images is specifically pointed out by Marcus Cornelius Fronto in a letter to Marcus Aurelius, ca. A.D. 148: '"Youknow that in all the banks, booths, shops and taverns, gables, porches and windows, anywhere and everywhere, there are portraits of you exposed to public view, badly painted for the most part or carved in a plain, not to say worthless, artistic style. Still, all the same, your likeness, however unlike you, never meets my eyes when I am out without making me part my lips in a smile and dream of you."'33 The physiognomy of the Theater bust resembles portraits of Antoninus Pius of the main type.134 Pius's portraits in Naples and in Rome exhibit similar diagonal locks over the central forehead and projections of hair at the temples.135 If this association is accepted, the sculptor of the Corinth

bust would be adhering to Greek tradition in thickening the hair, enlarging the beard to correspond in thickness with the head hair, and reducing the amount of tooling in the hair.136In creating this bust he may have followed a Greek model that had already been modified from the official type, a practice that has been noted for Roman Greece and Cyrene.137 A bust with tall base and imperial subject suggests association with imperial cult ritual. The bust may have been dropped during a religious procession into or out of the Theater, via the main east-west

street that leads toward the Theater. If so, it would provide evidence

that

religious ceremonies took place in the Corinth Theater, as at other theaters, during the Roman period.138 NORTH OF EAST PARODOS AND EAST THEATER PLAZA (74-77) 74

Youth as Hermes

Pls. 65, 66

Pls. 65:a, b; 66:a, b 74A Torso S-3738. Theater, East Theater Plaza, northwest of Erastus inscription, 1.5 m west of break on pavement, lying north-south with head facing north, 1928 (Corinth

NB 322, pp. 713-714; 321, pp. 677-678, at 19). P.H. 1.050, W. neck 0.115, W. at shoulder 0.455, W. waist 0.268, Th. neck 0.110, Th. waist 0.187, H. clavicle depression to bottom r. knee 0.905, H. navel to bottom r. knee 0.590; break on r. thigh: L. 0.170, D. 0.055; break 130. See Nock 1930; Scott 1931; Robert 1960, pp. 316-324; Lahusen 1978; Pekary 1968; 1985, pp. 66-80. 131. Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum VI 3253a: Rumscheid 2000, p. 124, no. 20, pl. 11:1. 132. Riccardi 2000. Arr. Peripl. M. Eux. 1.1-4. 133. Fronto, Ep. 4.12.4, trans. Birley, adapted in Elsner 1998, p. 54. 134. On the difficulties of analyzing small-scale portraits, see Giuliano 1953-1955, esp. p. 164, note 12; Conti 1971, p. 96, for reference to small busts as divinized imagines;Fittschen and Zanker 1985, pp. 63-66 (with references), no. 59, pls. 67-69, on Capitoline Museums, Stanza degli Imperatori 26, inv. 446;

on lower 1. thigh: L. 0.085, D. 0.060; strut on r. hip 0.050 x 0.050 m. Twojoining pieces; statue broken diagonally through neck, at both elbows, above left knee, below right, and through mantle behind chest. Upper and front surfaces exhibit considerable weathering, with encrustation on the upper. Bibliography: Shear 1928b, pp. 487-488, fig. 9; Schwingenstein 1977, p. 74; Fuchs 1987, p. 187, note 657.

and Wegner 1979, pp. 96-123. 135. Fittschen and Zanker 1985, Appendix, pl. 48 (Naples, Museo Nazionale 6071); pl. 49:c, f-i (Rome, Museo Nazionale 1219). See also Fittschen 1982. 136. For comment on these features, see Zanker 1983, pp. 26-30. 137. For Greece, see AgoraI, pp. 82-84, 87-90; de Grazia 1973, pp. 53-57. For Cyrene,see Rosenbaum 1960, pp. 5-13. 138. On religious processions in Roman theaters, see Price 1984, pp. 102-107, 109-113, 210-211; W6rrle 1988; Rogers 1991; and Gebhard 1996.

190

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

74B Left forearm P1. 65:c S-3608. Museum marble pile, Shear's excavations, probably from the Theater. P.L. 0.174, diams. wrist 0.055, 0.045, diams. elbow 0.088, 0.082 m. Single fragment; arm broken at wrist and elbow. 74C Pouch of Hermes, in right hand P1. 65:d T-375. Theater, northeast corner of Peristyle Court, section H10, on pavement, 1929 (Corinth NB 324, p. 879). P.L. 0.105, max. W. 0.076, Th. 0.049; finger: p.L. 0.047, max. W. 0.016 m. Single fragment; pouch broken across top; most of hand missing, retaining first finger through second knuckle, break from attachment of thumb and base of strut at lower right. Missing chips from the two lower corners; surface slightly discolored. Bibliography: CorinthIX, ii, no. G7-2. 74A-C: Marble, white, fine to medium grained; micaceous; Pentelic. These three pieces are associated based on similarity of marble, technique, and scale. 74A depicts a male figure of roughly life-size proportions that stands in a chiastic pose, the weight on the right leg and the left shoulder raised, carrying a cloak. The preserved section of the neck shows that the head faced proper left and that the hair was short. The median line curves strongly to the right, and the right hip is considerably higher than the left; the left leg is placed slightly ahead of the right. Both arms swing out from the body. Rendering of anatomy is precise and hard, but not exaggerated. Both the nipples and areolas are sharply raised, as if in a bronze prototype they had been separately attached. The pubic hair is sharply chiseled, but not thick. The right arm was attached to the hip by a strut, partially preserved, whereas the left arm, free from the torso, bent upward to hold an implement against the upper arm. Two small protrusions (each ca. 0.02 x 0.03 m) that survive from this implement indicate that it was carved in one piece with the statue and that it was ca. 0.035 m wide where it touched the top of the arm. The chlamys reached to the back of the knee (probably after turning

over the forearm), where a large projection of stone (L. 0.090, W. 0.060 m) indicates its point of connection. An attachment (L. 0.170, W. 0.054 m) is broken from the middle of the outer right thigh, but not along the entire leg as with, for example, the Amazon (67) or Artemis(?) (18). Its shape and location may indicate it was an identifying attribute,such as a goat or sheep, although a tree trunkcould havebeen attachedto the thigh in only this small area, as in the Hermes from Andros.'39 The attachment break does not correspond in size to those of the pouch 74C. Smoothed drill channels in and around the edges of the garmentare deep, strong,and straight-sided.Strongly drilled channels also outline the pubes. Sharp chiseled creases define the underarms.Fine chisel lines markthe separationof the attachmentsfrom the torso. Marksof a sharp rasp remain over the side and rear surfaces of the statue and garment. 74B is the forearm,probablythe left, whichwasbent at the elbowwith the wristfacing the body,judgingfrom the sharpertooling on the inside.The contoursof the armare even, lackingmodeling,veins,or traceof attachment.The outer surface has a smooth, hard finish, like that of 74A. 74C preserves a thick triangularpouch from a freestanding figure. The bulging leather pouch is represented as stitched on the outer edges, hemmed, and perhapsknottedat the corners.The front is fairlysmooth, bearing faint, diagonal rasp marks,while the back has a relativelycoarser,rasped finish. The pouch was held by the right hand at the figure's side with most of the hand positioned behind the pouch. The first two digits of the firstfinger and a break from the missing thumb remain. A small strut at lower proper left (L. 0.026, W. 0.016 m) indicates the lower point of attachment to the statue. The finger's long, slender proportions and its carefully worked nail and digit suggest a youthful statue of some quality.Since the piece was found in the northeast section of the Peristyle Court, an association with 74A is appealing. For a similarly elongated and carefully finished finger, compare the hand of the "Isis"funerary relief of Alexandra in the National Museum in Athens dated to the Late Hadrianic period.140 Hadrianic(?).

This statue of a youth presents a standing nude male figure bearing a cloak over the left shoulder and carryingan objectagainstthe left arm.The sharplychiseled naveland crisp,appliquelike nipples recall the cold workof a bronze statue, suggesting this piece may have been modeled on a bronze original, though it could also represent a marble statue in "bronze style" without a

specific prototype.'41The freedom of movement conveyed by the weight on the right leg, the raised left shoulder, and the outwardswing of the arms is also suggestive of bronze. The unusually animated pose resultsfrom the sharp curve of the median line, the abrupt pull of the mantle toward the left arm, and the facing of the head to proper left, the side of the free leg. The

proportions and genitalia indicate that the subjectis young, but past puberty.The garment should probably be viewed as a chlamys rather than a himation or paludamentum, as it is too short to depict either of those larger cloaks, and it lacks the large button that usually secures the longer, 139. Andros, Museum 245 (once Athens, NM 218): LIMCV, no. 950a, s.v. Hermes (Siebert). 367, p. 140. Athens, NM 1193: Walters 1988, pp. 75-76, pl. 24:a, b; Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 75.

141. For the addition of copper nipples to bronze statues, cf. the Riace bronzes: Mattusch 1988, pp. 201-204; Due bronzi, II, color plates A:35-36, 44, 45; B:36, 44.

NORTH OF EAST PARODOS AND EAST THEATER PLAZA

191

military cloak when it is worn suspended from the left shoulder.142The statues of "Gaius"and "Lucius"Caesarat Corinth, of related body type, also carrychlamydeswith no buttons, but their cloaks appear to be larger than the one on our statue, for they extend farther down the chest, reaching the nipple on S-1065.143 Over the shoulder the garment forms a V-pattern, which reflects the action of the hand pulling it into this position.144 In addition, there are no flatter folds crossing the upper shoulder, which

usually appear in statues carrying the mantle over the shoulder. The lower end of the cloak would have been wrapped around the forearm and reached to the knee, where a strut secured it to the torso. Despite Schwingenstein's identification of this statue as a copy of the Diadoumenos, the ar-

rangement of the chlamys,which is suspended from the left shoulder,signalsthe Hermes Richelieu A large number of statues combine this draperyarrangement with an otherwise statuarytype.145 nude, youthful male figure in hip-shot pose. The torsos vary somewhat in degree of fleshiness, curve of the linea alba, and presence of pubic hair, but the proportions are consistently more slender than those of figures like the Hermes of Andros or Hermes Farnese.46The slim proportions of many examples are well illustrated by figures in Seville and Florina.147The prototype of the Richelieu type is generally accepted as post-Polykleitan and of the mid-4th century B.C., but

of the These differences of interpretation riooriginal. opinions have varied widely as to the artist result in part from variationsin pose, proportions, and qualityof the copies or reflections, as well as from a paucity of information as to the style of lesser 4th-century B.C. artists. The lack of an obvious constant among the copies suggests that the prototype was not followed in specific details, but that the sculptures were adjusted, depending on the style of the period in which they were produced and on the desired effect. The Corinth Theater statue denotes the popularity of the type into the Hadrianic period. As one of the most adaptable types, the Hermes Richelieu type was considered appropriate for depictions of Hermes, Apollo, Dionysos, the Dioskouroi, and Alexander.148As an idealized statuary type, it was also one of the most popular vehicles for Roman portraits; hence, Shear's suggestion that our torso carried a portrait of one of the Augustan family, possibly Gaius or Lucius Caesar.149Witness also the statues of Trajan in Copenhagen and Hadrian in Vaison-la-Romaine and Pergamon that follow the format of the Hermes Richelieu type.150The narrow object carried against the left arm could represent a caduceusor sword sheath. The shoulder-mantle, weapon or 142. Cf. Niemeyer 1968, nos. 107, 110, 126, pls. 40, 41, 47. 143. S-1065,S-1080:CorinthIX,nos. 135,136 (see also Chapter 7, note 16 above). 144. Oehler (1961, p. 50) called this pattern the "Nestbausch"in his study of Roman draped male figures. 145. Schwingenstein1977, p. 74;his identificationis rejected Fuchs (1987,p. 187,note 657). Ourfigure'sarmsarenot raised by high enough to mirrorthe Diadoumenostype.The HermesRichelieu type, first treated by Mariani(1907) and Lippold (1911), wasmore definitivelydiscussedbyAdriani (1933). Of the three types distinguished by Adriani, it is Type C from the mid-4th century B.c.-represented by the Hermes Richelieu, Louvre 573-that the Corinthstatuemost closelyresembles.The name piece of the type is illustrated in Adriani 1933, fig. 6; Arnold 1969, pl. 13:c;Ridgway1972, no. 16, fig. 4:a;and LIMCV,p. 367, no. 946, s.v.Hermes(Siebert).For the variabilityof the body type, see Arnold 1969,pp. 183-189,274-279 (copylist);Ridgway1972, pp. 45-48, no. 16;Inan 1975,pp. 74-77, no. 22;Vierneisel-Schl6rb 1979, pp. 283-289, no. 27; and Ridgway1997, p. 337, pl. 82. 146. Hermes of Andros (AndrosMuseum245, once Athens, NM 218): Ridgway1997, p. 181, note 14; pp. 262, 337, 349, pl. 81; Lippold 1950, p. 275, note 2; Ridgway1984, p. 85, pls. 110, 111. Farnese: Ridgway1984, p. 85, pls. 108, 109. Cf. also the stance of the Diomedes from Cumae (Fuchs 1983, fig. 83), now in Naples, after a prototype of ca. 430 B.c., which has a similar

swing to the torso, disposition of weight, curve of central line, and ratherpronounced modeling, though heavierproportions. 147. Seville:Manderscheid1981, nos. 36,37. Florina:Arnold 1969, p. 277, no. 19a; Daux 1960, pp. 765, 767, fig. 4, possibly after a 5th-century B.C. type.

148. On Hermes, see note 145 above.Apollo, cf. LIMCII,p. 209, no. 196,s.v.Apollon(Palagia),a variantof the Apollo Lykeios (Simon). Dionysos: type;pp. 379-380, no. 54, s.v.Apollon/Apollo LIMCIII, p. 433, no. 102, s.v.Dionysos(Gasparri).Dioskouroi: LIMCIII,p. 571, no. 32, s.v.Dioskouroi(Hermary),Bologna relief; p. 615, no. 30, s.v.Dioskouroi/Castores (Gury),Naples statue with horse protome/support from Baiae,2nd centuryA.c.; British Museum statuette:Walters1915, pl. 22. Alexander:LIMCI, p. 519, no. 99, s.v.Alexandros(Hampe), painting from Stabiae. 149. Shear 1928b, pp. 487-488. Cf. the portraitsof"Gaius" and "Lucius"Caesarfrom theJulian Basilicaat Corinth (S-1065, S-1080: CorinthIX, nos. 135, 136), and S-1973from the South Basilicaat Corinth (de Grazia1973, no. 106), dated Claudian. 150. Copenhagen, Ny CarlsbergGlyptotek543a: Niemeyer 1968, no. 107, pl. 40. Vaison, Musee Municipal, from the theater:Niemeyer 1968, pp. 33, 110, no. 110, pl. 41, which is close to the Corinth statue, but the latterhas harder modeling and a stronger central curve. Pergamon, BergamaMuseum 160 (P1. 28:dhere): Niemeyer 1968, no. 111;Inan and Rosenbaum1966, no. 31, pls. 18:1, 2; 19:1.

192

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

caduceus, nudity, and scale seen here would be appropriate for the portrait of a younger mem-

ber of the imperial family,a victorious athlete, or a youthful god. The pouch, if it belongs, would depict the money bag of Hermes, marking him as a god of trade. The money bag is carried by statuettes of Hermes in Athens and Paris and by youths depicted in the guise of Hermes in Rome

and Mantua.151The identity of the Corinth piece, however, remains uncertain because of the absence of the head and attributes. On the Corinth youth the rendering of the central torso is tauter than that of the Vaison Hadrian, the Delphi Antinous, or the statue of Apollo on a Hadrianic roundel of the Arch of

Constantine in Rome.152This difference, however,may not be pertinent to the Corinth figure's date, as the Hadrian represents a much older man, Antinous is generally characterizedas plump and fleshy,and Apollo is often rendered as fleshy because younger than the subjectof the Corinth statue. The lively pose and sharp execution might at first suggest an Antonine date. The lack of drillwork at the separation of the struts and attributes, however, would seem surprising at this date. The sharp rasping on the torso's sides corresponds to areas in the Hadrianic Gigantomachy reliefs from the Corinth Theater, such as the snakes and the sides of the giants' torsos, and the

use of a small drill to mark the centers of holes in the pubic hairs also finds parallels in those reliefs.153

As the statue'sscale is smaller than that of sculpturesrestored between columns on the scaenae

frons, it is probably not from that location. It may, instead, have been set up near its findspot, on the south side of East Theater Plaza or near the doorway from this plaza into the Peristyle Court, where it would have "greeted" the visitor entering the Theater along this route. P1. 66:c Finger from bronze sculpture T-1021/B-50. Theater, East Theater Plaza, section K9 in drain, 1929 (Corinth NB 324, p. 892, drawing). Lost. P.L. 0.095 m. Finger broken at base. Bronze, probably hollow cast. A finger from a large bronze statue, life-size or slightly over. The notebook drawing shows a finger, disengaged, that is extended and slightly bent. It may depict the index finger because it is not connected to the other fingers. The digits and nail appear well rendered. The statue was possibly set up on the south side of East Theater Plaza. Corinth has preserved few fragments of large-scale bronze sculpture. Only three fingers are published in CorinthXII, the large compendium of minor objects by Davidson. Roman, based on find context.154

75

P.H. 0.274, p.W. 0.090, D. nose to rear 0.206, L. face

0.135, W. from side cheek to center nose at lower eyelid

Female portrait P1. 67:a, b T-983/Sc. 73. Theater, north of east parodos, between Byzantine reservoir in the East Hall and the south side of East Theater Plaza, in section 18, 1929 (Corinth NB 322, p. 808).

level 0.050, W. center mouth to side cheek 0.050-0.052 m. Single fragment; head broken at the base of the neck and vertically at the middle of the left eye (left side is broken, not prepared for piecing) .155Chips missing from nose, chin, lower cheek, and neck, elsewhere the original surface is fairly well preserved; worked surface yellowed, covered with root marks, the broken surface and left side of the face heavily encrusted. Bibliography: Shear 1929, p. 530, fig. 12; Sturgeon 1989, p. 116, fig. 3, pl. 43. Marble, white, small to medium grained; some mica; Pentelic. This portrait wears a simplified, unfinished version of a Trajanic to Hadrianic turban coiffure, composed of hair piled high on the back of the crown. The hair lacks chiseled details, so it is difficult to determine if it is piled unbraided on the head, if braids were intended, or if the coiffure is covered by a veil. The raised segment before the turban could represent the rolled edge of a veil, a fillet, or a thick strand or braid of hair. Above the forehead a depression marks a central part, and the bumpy surface of the hair is probably meant to suggest wavy

151. For Hermes holding a pouch, see the gold figurine in Athens, also with caduceus, NM 282 (LIMC V, p. 371, no. 974d, s.v. Hermes[Siebert]), and the bronze figurine in Paris, also with caduceus and wings on head, Louvre Br 1055 (p. 369, no. 964). For youths in the guise of Hermes: Vatican Museums, Sala a Croce Greca 561, of ca. A.D. 100, and Mantua, Palazzo Ducale, of ca. A.D. 170-180 (Meyer 1991, nos. 206, 210, pls. 29, 30), both of which have the pouch and caduceus, the Vatican piece also with the chlamys arranged as in our figure. 152. Vaison, Musee Municipal: Niemeyer 1968, p. 110, no. 110, pl. 41. Antinous: Meyer 1991, pp. 218-221, pl. 133:2. Arch of Constantine: Koeppel 1986.

153. Cf. the male statue including head, wearing chlamys fastenedat rightshoulder,discoveredin 1979in Kephissia,dated ca. A.D. 150 (Kazianis1982). The Kephissiastatue represents a later Attic version of the same tradition. On the theaterfrieze,for rasping,see, e.g., the snake (Corinth IX, ii, p. 36, no. G27, pl. 23) and the giant (p. 40, no. G36-1,pl. 29); for drilled pubic hair, see CorinthIX, ii, p. 40, no. G36-1, pl. 29. 154. Forbronze fingers,see Corinth XII, pp. 64-65, nos. 487489 (MF-6317,MF-6440,MF-1292),pl. 47; from Olympia, see Bol 1978, pls. 20, 38-40, 53, 72. 155. There is no line or ridge along the break to suggest

76

NORTH OF EAST PARODOS AND EAST THEATER PLAZA

strands.Bycontrast,the fillet or lock above the forehead hair is in higher relief and has a smoothed outer surface. A wide, undetailed furrowseparatesthe fillet or lock from the large tubularroll of the turban,which is thicker at the nape than at the crown and has a circulardepression in the back. A vertical plane near the lower break may represent the hanging tie of the "fillet"or turban. A similar lack of finishing detail characterizesthe facial features. The inner edges of the eyelids are faintly marked. The upper lid projects farther than the lower, extending beyond it at the outer corner, and a sharp crease marksthe upper edge of the upper lid. The pupil is only lightly recessed and relativelyflat, the upper part projecting farther than the lower.The center of the ear

193

is not marked and the lobe is not undercut. The small mouth is soft and turns down at the outer corner. The forehead and cheeks are free of lines and indication of bones. Despite the absence of final carving in the hair and eyes, final stages exist elsewhere on this head.156 Light rasping marks the skin, and the projecting fillet or lock of hair is smoothed. There is no sign of drillwork, and the chisel edge is rarely used. Hair in the forehead and turban areas is sketchily tooled with a round-ended chisel. Marks from a point remain on the turban, and claw-chisel strokes toward the front of it indicate the shift to a finer stage of carving, which was not continued. Hadrianic.

The right two-thirds of a head just under life-size presents a portrait of a woman, probably from a bust or statue in the round. Despite its fragmentary state, the piece conveys an image of a young woman with a solemn, modest demeanor and a matter-of-fact, almost resigned expression. The simplified treatment of the coiffure and the soft facial modeling emphasize volume rather than decoration. Although the eye and headdress appear unfinished, rasping over the skin shows that no further work was intended in this area. Perhaps the eyes and coiffure were intended to be completed by a specialized head carver, but he or the funds for his work never materialized. In the end, paint may have provided more detail and helped to counter the unfinished impression. This Corinthian version of the turban coiffure possesses a balanced sense of design without concern for refined details. A head in the Capitoline Museums, which Zanker dates to the Late Trajanic to Hadrianic period, provides a more strongly articulated example of a nest of braids worn with parted forehead hair.157The Capitoline piece still retains the vertical stylization of forehead hair characteristic of the Trajanic period. In the Corinth piece, by contrast, the forehead hair has a central part in the classicizing manner typical of Hadrianic portraits, notably those of Sabina. A portrait in Athens sometimes identified as Sabina, which Carandini dates ca. A.D. 128-129, combines similar forehead hair with a simple, unbraided pile of hair higher on the crown.158Locks or twisted strands crossing the central crown, which provide a possible explanation for the raised midsection of the Corinthian coiffure, occur in a number of examples, for instance, in a Hadrianic portrait from Crete in Athens159and in the portrait of a young woman in Rome, dated Late Hadrianic to Early Antonine.160 On the Capitoline head, the nest of braids, considerably smaller and higher than the Corinth head's turban, presents a format common in Late Hadrianic to Early Antonine times. The full lips and cheeks of the Corinth portrait bear a certain likeness to a private portrait in New York, although this latter head also wears the smaller, later nest of braids.'16A similar hair arrangement is seen at Corinth, finished with much greater detail, on a fine head from the Demeter Sanctuary on Acrocorinth.162 In addition, the small, that the head was broken from a relief, and the left eye does not appearmodified in shape or rendering,which is frequently the casewithhigh-reliefheads. Cf.84 here and some heads from the Theaterreliefs,e.g. Corinth IX, ii, p. 68, nos. A3-4, pl. 45. 156. For studies of different stages of finish on sculptures that were utilized, see, e.g., Brinkmann 1998 and Rehak 1998. 157. Antiquarium4973: Fittschenand Zanker1983, no. 72. Compare also a Greek portrait in Athens that represents a Trajanicstage of this hairstyle:AgoraI, no. 20. 158. Athens, NM 449: Carandini1969, pp. 161-166, no. 27, figs. 110-112; see also his useful diagrams of hairstyles;Wegner 1956, pl. 43; West 1941, p. 125, no. 1 (A.D. 125 or 128/9); Datsouli-Stavridi1985, pp. 45-46, pl. 43; Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 78. For a similarhead in Thessaloniki,see Datsouli-Stavridi 1974, figs. 3, 4; and Carandini 1969, p. 148, no. 19, from ca. A.D. 125-128.

159. Athens, NM 357: Carandini 1969, p. 169, no. 31, figs. 165, 166, dated ca. A.D. 129-131, possibly Sabina; DatsouliStavridi1985, pp. 40-41, pl. 36, possiblya posthumous Plotina; Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 70, Plotina, likened to Aphrodite, A.D. 120-130. See also Fittschen and Zanker 1983, p. 8, cat. 7, no. 5, a privateportraitof the Hadrianicperiod (F), which appears to be recut from a Classicalhead and probably represents Sabina;Weber (1999) discussesthe evidence for its recutting. 160. Rome, Capitoline Museums, Sala delle Colombe 13, inv. 201: Fittschen and Zanker1983, no. 100. 161. MMA10.210.22:Fittschenand Zanker1983, p. 77, Appendix, pl. 18. 162. S-2667:Stroud 1965, p. 21, pl. 10:c;de Grazia1973, p. 150, no. 27, where dated Late Hadrianic to EarlyAntonine.

194

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

fleshy mouth recalls the soft articulation of a Late Trajanic portrait in Athens, though on the Theater head the regular features and central part create a more classical impression.163 On the Corinth head, the very clear sectioning of the coiffure and the position of the broad turban, which is full nearly to the nape, seem to result from a continuing use of Trajanic forms, treated here as large volumes, without the Trajanic interest in linear surface decoration. An Early to Middle Hadrianic date seems likely (A.D. 118-128), although it is difficult to tell how long the impact of the court style might have continued to be in use in Corinth. The head is not treated with the detail that one sees at Corinth in the Late Hadrianic period, as exemplified by the Antinous head from the Theater (25A, 25B). The Theater portrait is a private portrait that was created under the influence of imperial styles. Given its present state of preservation, it is difficult to tell if it was displayed. The lack of finish, however, is not as extreme as on sculptures that appear to have been workshop pieces, such as some portrait busts and the heads on some sarcophagi.164With these pieces, it seems that the workshop was waiting for an interested patron to determine the final details. The Theater head appears to have been used with minimal carved details in the hair and eyes, like some Roman portraits from elsewhere in the eastern Mediterranean.165 77

Head of Dionysos(?) P1. 67:c, d T-83. Theater, north of east parodos and south of cistern, in contents of a late oven, 1929 (Corinth NB 322, p. 805, section 17). P.H. 0.105, W. 0.081, p.Th. 0.048 m. Single fragment, preserving the right eye, cheek, and much of the hair; the back is flat and smoothed; head sliced vertically from the central crown, missing most of face and large chip from hair at upper right. Parts of the crown are chipped, badly worn, and weathered, with some encrustation. Marble, opaque grayish white, fine grained.166 Preserved is the upper front portion of an effeminate head, belonging to a figure ca. 0.90 m tall. The flat, smoothed back results from secondary working. There is no cutting for an attachment at back and no rough tooling to aid the adhesion of cement, and therefore no evidence for its mode of reuse. It may have been pieced

onto the back of a head, inserted into a relief, or fitted onto an akrolithic statue. The figure wears over the upper crown a wreath that appears to be composed of fruit and pointed leaves. A band, perhaps a mitra, the outlines of which are visible at proper left, curves down from the wreath to cross the edge of the forehead. The hair is parted in the center and arranged in soft, regular waves, plastically treated over the crown and temples.167The locks are pulled back from the face, as if for a knot at the nape. The forehead is low and curves evenly around to the back. The small eye is shallowly set. The upper lid is emphasized, the lower, less distinct but clearly set off from the cheek, which is quite round before the break. Furrows in the hair are softly rendered, lacking any sign of drillwork. The work is careful, tool marks having been eliminated from hair and facial surfaces. Hellenistic.

The head may represent a youthful Dionysos, since it wears a mitra and wreath, although a muse, maenad, or young girl is also possible.168The placement of the mitra, which barely touches the forehead before curving back up into the hair, coincides with configurations of heads of Dionysos of the Capitoline/Copenhagen type.169This type also exhibits the low, broad forehead and high cheeks of the Corinth piece. The type has been interpreted as deriving from a proto163. Athens, NM 2313: Datsouli-Stavridi1985, pp. 41-42, pl. 37; Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 71. 164. For a portraitbust with finished drapery,but roughly shaped hair and unfinished skin, see Rosenbaum 1960, no. 90, a female bust in Cyrene.For a sarcophagusthat is finished except for the faces, which have no features, see Koch and Sichtermann 1982, fig. 421 (Thessaloniki,no. 1245). 165. Cf. the lack of carved eyelids in a bust from Cyrene (Rosenbaum 1960, no. 253), dated EarlyAntonine. 166. This stone appearselsewhereat Corinth,as in the small Hekateion S-2270/2319 found in 1937 west of the Bema, but not enough evidence survivesto tell if its use was typical of a certain period. 167. The top of a somewhat larger head with similar hair arrangement(S-2218),found in 1936 in the South Basilica,may suggest that this type was popular at Corinth.

168. On Dionysos, cf. the statues of Richelieu and Horti Lamianitype and the Capitoline/Copenhagen head type, each of which is reflectedin numeroussmall-scaleversions;see LIMC III,pp. 435-436,445, nos. 122, 123,203, s.v.Dionysos(Gasparri), and pp. 540-566, s.v.Dionysos/Bacchus (Gasparri).On the Muses, see Ridgway1990a, pp. 246-274; LIMCVI, pp. 657-681, s.v. Mousa, Mousai (Queyrel); LIMCVII, pp. 991-1013, s.v. Mousa, Mousai (Faedo); pp. 1013-1059, s.v. Mousa, Mousai/Musae

(Lancha,Faedo). On depictions of young girls,see, e.g., Rfhfel 1984, pp. 243-254, 287-288. 169. Capitoline Museums, Galleria 71: StuartJones 19121926, I, pp. 324-325, no. 19, pl. 81; LIMCIII,p. 445, no. 203a, s.v. Dionysos(Veneri). Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 2039: Poulsen 1951, no. 153a; LIMCIII, p. 445, no. 203b, s.v. Dionysos(Veneri). The line of the mitra on the Corinth head recalls the position of thick dinner wreathsworn by terracotta

EAST THEATER STREET

195

type of about the middle of the 4th century B.C.170 The Corinth head may be a somewhat generalized reflection of this type. The round cheeks, soft eyes and hair,and careful finish suggest that it was produced in the Hellenistic period.171Since this head and 94 are similar in iconography, they illustrate the persistence over roughly 400 years of the tradition of representing Dionysos at Corinth and contrasting waysof executing the schema. Other, Roman versions of this head type appear at Corinth, notably an over life-size head and one somewhat larger than the Theater head, both wearing mitra and ivywreath.172 In its reuse, the head may have been cemented onto another piece to form a complete head. In A S-1046,for example, a face of white marble is attached to a head of variegated pink marble.173 small bearded herm of pink marble (S-2654), which similarlyhas a very smooth, flat back set verticallybehind the ears, may indicate that such modes of piecing heads were common in Roman Corinth. Our head could have received this type of treatment in its secondary phase.174 EAST THEATER STREET (78-81) P1.68 78 Headless female bust S-82-5.Eastof Theater,just east of paved street in area of smallshops inside the gate crossingEastTheater Street (Grid 95 B:B, B:77), in deep disturbed fill below poros chips; found lying on its back in south scarp under line of wall 1, 2.25 m east of road,1751982 (Corinth NB 731, p. 126). H. 0.388, W. 0.502, W. neck 0.131, L. bottom neck to bottom 0.240, W. support in front 0.100; neck break:W. 0.120, D. 0.115 m. Single fragment;lacking head, which was attached by means of a dowel. Missing chips from central support and fold edges; lower chiton discolored as if from water collecting against it, heavier weathering and encrustation across back and shoulders; root marks over most surfaces. Marble, white, fine to medium grained; no visible mica; probablyPentelic. The Female portraitbustwearingtunic and mantle.176 bust includes the shoulders and midchest and is slightly hollowed at back around the thickened central support. Modelingon the neck indicatesthatthe head faced threequarters proper right. The head was attached at the

base of the chin, minimizing the effect of the join. The joining surface is chipped and lacks the usual tooled preparation for an attachment. A pour channel (p.L. 0.035, diam. 0.010 m) cut at the rear left facilitated setting the dowel in position. One end of the iron dowel is still secured in place by lead that spilled over onto the joining surface (max. W. spill 0.034 m).177 The lack of prepared joining surface and the large lead spill over the broken surface indicate that the attachment of the head was secondary. This may have occurred as a repair, or possibly in reuse of the bust for a different head. The shoulders are broad and erect. Incisions and shallow folds suggest the thin, crinkly texture of the tunic, which sinks at the neck, creating crossing folds. The small button at the right shoulder also has a textured surface, as if made of fabric. Mantle folds are rendered with irregular undulations and considerable volume, projecting up to 0.06 m from the torso. The undercutting of high-relief folds is careful, and drill channels are smoothed even if they would not have been visible. Drapery is carefully smoothed, though not polished, while upper areas of the neck, which are less weathered, re-

masks, but the object worn by our head does not seem large enough to be a wreath;cf. Bieber 1961a,figs. 344, from Samsun, in the Louvre, and 345, from Myrina,in Boston. 170. Pochmarski 1974, pp. 169-170; Brendel in EA 39553956. 171. Cf. statues of children of the late 4th and early 3rd centuries B.C.:Ridgway1990a, pp. 338, 348, note 39, pls. 175, 176; Ruhfel 1984. 172. S-1500, from area of New Museum, p.H. 0.220, p.W. 0.224 m; S-1452,from PeribolosofApollo, p.H. 0.115, p.W.0.112 m. S-1452,in hard pink limestone, providesa good illustration of the Roman practice of sharpening and regularizing facial features,which gives the face a classicalimpression though it is set in a head type that derivesfrom the Hellenistic period. 173. S-1046/1471: CorinthIX, p. 69, no. 127. This head wore earrings,centrallyparted hair,possiblya scarf, and a thick hair knot at back; the top is heavily weathered and the right side appears shiny from the oil of human hands. As the piece was attached at the base of the neck and the neck stretched for-

ward, it may have served as the right finial for an elaborate throne with sphinx head finials;the eyes were inserted. 174. S-2654,with long fillets, found in the 1961 excavations, Forum SW,H. 0.155, W. 0.085 m. Cf. also S-77-16,a wreathed head of darkred sandstone, probablyDionysos,with a flat back with heavy point marks to facilitate attachment, from Forum SW;and S-91-1,red sandstonebust of a beardlessDionysosfrom Temple Hill, H. 0.203 m, with inset eyes, flat back with punch marks. 175.Wall1 runseast-west,opposite the second buttresssouth of the east parodos. For the area,see Williamsand Zervos1983, pp. 10-14, fig. 3. 176. On women's dress, see Scholz 1992; Goldman 1994a, pp. 221-223, 228. 177. Claridge (1990, p. 143) notes, in reference to the "inverted V-shapedbuttjoin," thatjoins at the top of the neck are common; cf. also pp. 144-145, fig. ll:m, a join at the base of the neck via a metal dowel in a flat surface slanting upward (head of SeptimiusSeverus,Rome, CapitolineMuseums,Museo

196

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

tain a highly smoothed finish. Heavy weathering suggests that the piece was displayed outside. The rectangular support, which could have been inscribed with a name, is undecorated, the front surface

scored with a drove, the bottom smoothed. The back of the support, in low relief, presents an irregular kalathos shape. Hadrianic to Early Antonine.

The length of this bust indicates a date in the first half of the 2nd century A.C., and the full, plastic treatment points to the Hadrianic or Early Antonine period.178Although the small breasts may suggest a youthful subject, the monumentality and breadth of shoulders make this unlikely. In addition, breasts are often deemphasized in female busts of this length.179 Busts of Faustina the Younger, such as those in Athens, Paris, and Erbach, tend to be longer and less plastically rendered, indicating an earlier date for the Corinth sculpture.180 Some busts of Faustina the Elder are of similar length, though not as broad, and a bust from Cyrene of Early Antonine date, though also reaching to the breasts with heavy folds across the front, is of longer, narrower format and has more schematic folds.18l The variability in length and shape of these busts complicates the problem of chronology, for none is quite the same as the Corinth Theater bust. Busts reaching to midchest with comparably plastic drapery are known on grave altars from Beroia in northern Greece, which Riisch dates to the Hadrianic period based on their hairstyles and inscriptions. One in particular has a similarly strong sense of volume and horizontal emphasis, which suggests that the Hadrianic to Early Antonine period may be the most likely date for our bust.182An Antonine private portrait in Rome that retains its head conveys a similar impression, despite its longer format.183Two other female portrait busts at Corinth from the 2nd century A.C. also have uninscribed "name plates," though they are more detailed than ours, with incised upper and lower borders and molded sides.184Fittschen has grouped kalathos-shaped supports on the back of Attic portrait busts, of which our support is a simplified version.'85 The over life-size scale and the posture suggest that the subject was a person of some importance, either herself a civic donor or the wife of a major local benefactor or of the emperor. Signs of heavy weathering and water erosion over the upper surfaces suggest that the portrait was displayed out-of-doors, possibly in a shallow niche between buttresses next to the gate on East Theater Street, near the place where it was found.186In that case, the bust may have commemorated the dedication of a portion of the Theater. 79

P1. 69:a Right hand with drapery from statuette of Aphrodite (?) T-501/Sc. 59. Theater, East Theater Street, third section south of entrance to east parodos, about 0.3 m above second steps, 1928 (Corinth NB 321, p. 605). P.L. 0.110, p.W. 0.063, p.Th. 0.032, W. hand 0.033 m. Single fragment, once attached to upper arm just below the elbow; none of the attachment surface survives, but part of the dowel hole remains (p.L. 0.011 m). Marble, white, fine to medium grained. The right hand and forearm survive from a large statuette of a draped female figure, estimated H. ca. 0.70 m. The slender arm and fingers are delicately formed and

highly polished. Narrow fingers are separated by finely chiseled grooves; the long, narrow nails are carefully rendered. Rasping remains on the thumb and on the arm adjacent to the drapery, indicating that they were not intended to be seen. The hand grasps a bunch of drapery that it holds away from the body; the ends of some folds are preserved hanging down from the hand, held between the thumb and first finger. The right forearm, therefore, would have been directed upward, the wrist gracefully turned toward the head, one end of the mantle held up and slightly forward. 2nd century A.C.

Nuovo 2309). See also Claridge 1988. Onjoins at the top of the neck, cf. also a male portrait on Delos, A 4186 (Claridge 1988, fig. 3), and the Augustus in Thessaloniki (Niemeyer 1968, no. 76; Claridge 1988, p. 146, notes 21, 22, fig. 8). 178. In general, seeJucker 1961, esp. pp. 97-98, no. St 45, bust from Peiraieus in Paris (Louvre Ma 3068), A.D. 164; 38, pl. pp. 98-99, St 46, pl. 39, bust in Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek 791, ca. A.D. 160-170. Cf. Stavridi 1985, pl. 13, in Chania. 179. See Fittschen and Zanker 1983, p. 13. 180. Athens, NM 4536: Datsouli-Stavridi 1985, p. 65, pls. 79, 80, A.D. 160-170(?); Rhomiopoulou 1997, no. 88. Paris, Louvre 1144: Wegner 1939, pl. 36. Erbach: Fittschen 1977, no. 31, pl. 34, ca. A.D. 140-150.

181. Faustinathe Elderin Rome:Fittschenand Zanker1983, nos. 17, 18;cf. also Faustinathe Younger:Fittschenand Zanker 1983, nos. 19, 21. Cyrene:Rosenbaum 1960, no. 59. 182. Rfisch1969, p. 146, no. R6, figs. 74, 75 (note the strong undercutting); cf. also pp. 144-145, no. R3, fig. 71. 183. Rome, Museo Nazionale 113110:Felletti Maj1953, no. 213; MuzNazRom, I, 2, p. 52, no. I, 39, period of Faustina the Elder. 184. De Grazia 1973, pp. 338-339, nos. 111 (S-1866), 112 (S-3355). 185. Fittschen 2001. 186. On the location, see the plan in Williamsand Zervos 1984, p. 88, fig. 5.

EAST THEATER STREET

197

The arm position and the angle of the hand recall the hand of the Aphrodite of Louvre/

Naples type, though with somewhat varied positions of fingers and drapery. In the Corinth piece

the last two fingers are not extended as in the Louvre/Naples statues, and the hand is completely wrapped around the drapery bunch, the drapery adhering to the arm for its entire preserved length. Hence, this type may be referred to, but it has been altered. The pulling of the drapery away from the figure and the clasping of the bunch by all the fingers show that the subject is not

just fingering her drapery,like the woman on the left end of Corinth's Seven against Thebes Sarcophagus, for instance.'87 Other Aphrodite types also raise the mantle above the shoulder with the right hand, such as a large Hellenistic figure with Eros on her shoulder in the Athenian Agora. The same gesture, however, appears in depictions of young married women, as on the

mid-4th-centuryB.C.grave stele of Melite and on a Corinthian coin that shows Ino holding the infant Melikertes.The identification as Aphrodite therefore can only be tentative.188 As the high polish and hard, reflectivesurfacecomparewell with those featureson the Antinous head from Isthmia, this is Roman work, probably of the 2nd century A.C.189 P1. 69:b, c Fragmentary statuette of Aphrodite with bare left leg S-3571. Museum marble pile, from East Theater Street, second section south of entrance to east parodos, before stairs, at 15G, ca. 1.0 m above street level, 1928 (Corinth NB 321, p. 591). P.H. with plinth 0.077, p.H. figure 0.035, p.W. figure 0.054 m. Single fragment; statuette broken through ankles and vertically through plinth to left of figure. Missing some 80

chips. Marble, white, medium grained; possibly Parian.

The fragment derives from a small statuette of a standing figure wearing a mantle that hangs to the ground at back, at right, and between the feet, one tasseled end of which reaches the base just to proper right of the left foot. The feet are coarsely worked, the right possibly wearing a sandal. The figurine can be identified as Aphrodite on the basis of comparison with the base from a statuette of Aphrodite at Corinth (S-2531) on which a dolphin, standing on its head, is preserved at proper left.190 The Theater statuette is half again as large as S-2531, but of much coarser workmanship. Roman(?).

Soles has identified this type as "Aphrodite with a Bare Left Leg," of which a number of examples exist at Corinth and in the Athenian Agora.191As 11 examples have now been recognized at Corinth, this was clearly a popular type. Most are small statuettes and no two are exactly the same in size or rendering, so the type may have been reproduced over a broad period. Other versions of this Aphrodite type may be unrecognized as such because of their fragmentary state, as may be the case with the arm from the west parodos (63). The frequency of this statuary type at Corinth, of which there is a fine example found in a Roman tomb (S-2649), suggests that these figures reflect a statue very important in the city. Two marble figurines of the same type found at Cyrene, termed the Aphrodite of Agen by Paribeni, appear to be slender adaptations of the Capitoline Aphrodite type with the arms reversed, in which the drapery is held over the crotch at right and the left hand over the breasts.192In addition, two examples of the type were found in Athens in the Sanctuary of Aphrodite Pandemos.193 The two best-preserved examples at Corinth lack their heads, but otherwise give a clear indication of the pose, with both hands crossing the torso as in the Aphrodite of Agen. Since two of the 187. Corinth S-779: CorinthIX, no. 241. 188. See LIMCII, pp. 33-35, nos. 225-241, s.v.Aphrodite(Delivorrias), for Louvre/Naples and related types; and p. 43, no. 307, for Athens, Agora S-473. For the stele of Melite (Athens, NM 720), see Karouzou 1968, p. 89; Clairmont, CAT1.315; and Bol 1998, pl. 149:b. For the coin, see Imhoof-Blumer and Gardner [1885-1887] 1964, pp. 12-13, pl. B, no. XIX, period of Marcus Aurelius. 189. For the Antinous from Isthmia, see Isthmia IV, no. 57. 190. Corinth S-2531: Soles 1976, no. 20. 191. Soles 1976, nos. 12-21, esp. 20 (S-2531). The others include: S-1510, S-1517, S-2294, S-2349, S-2649, S-2656, S-2759, S-2843, and S-3694. Close comparanda are LIMC II, p. 81, nos. 727, 728, s.v. Aphrodite(Delivorrias); these small terracotta ver-

sions of the so-called Hermaphrodite Doria Pamphili type reinforce the idea that the Corinth figures may be associated with a local entity. Cf. LIMC V, p. 273, no. 22, s.v. Hermaphrodite (Ajootian) (= LIMC II, p. 81, no. 725, s.v. Aphrodite,with bibliography). The Roman tomb in which S-2649 was found is being studied by K. Slane and M. Walbank. A list of 14 examples of this type in the Athenian Agora was compiled by Soles. 192. Paribeni 1959, nos. 280, 281, pl. 135; cf. also EA 3274 (Villa Albani, no. 622; Bol 1989-1998, IV, pp. 114-117, no. 426) and 4045 (Lyon and Athens). A lamp with this image was found in the excavations for the Metro in Athens, as reported in a conference in Athens, February 6, 1999. 193. Travlos 1971, pp. 1, 2, 4, no. 6, fig. 5; Watzinger 1901, p. 331, note 1, no. 5a, fig. 21.

SCULPTURE FOR THE ENTRANCES

198

figures at Corinth (S-1510, S-1517) were found in the Sanctuary of Asklepios and Hygieia, they may represent an Aphrodite type with some relation to these deities. A related depiction of Aphrodite occurs on a lamp found in the Odeion at Corinth, which Broneer dates to the second half of the 1st century A.C.194In the lamp representation the mantle is similarlycaught between the legs, leaving the left leg bare, but the left arm is raised holding the mantle beside the head, while the right is held down and to the side, leaving the torso unprotected. In the absence of the upper part of the Theater figurine, it is not possible to tell which version of the type is presented. 81

P1. 69:d Left arm from statuette S-2563. Theater, southeast cavea entrance, 1.0 m below topsoil, 1948 (Corinth NB 112C, p. 80). P.L. arm 0.080, W. 0.043, W. wrist 0.014 m. Single fragment, arm broken at shoulder, wrist, and around drapery; back encrusted.

Marble, white, fine to medium grained. A slightly bent left arm from a small statuette, with a thick segment of drapery or some other object that lies loosely against it at right. Carving of the arm is generalized, the drapery is sharply undercut at bottom. Roman (?).

VOTIVE RELIEFS WITH NO FIND LOCATION (82-84) Hero banquet relief P1. 69:e T-376 (= S-3524). Theater (from Capps's list). As the piece was assigned a number shortly before 2 (T-389), it may also have been found in the eastern portion of the 1926 excavations, in front of the stage. P.H. 0.178, p.W. 0.176, Th. 0.058 m. Single fragment from the lower right corner of a relief. Surface worn and missing small chips, especially near right and lower border; weathered yellow. Marble, white, fine grained; probably Pentelic. The relief depicts the lower torso of a draped figure, reclining on his right side against pillows on a couch, before which stands a table with food, including two cakes of pyramidal shape. The figure holds a phiale in his right

82

hand. At the right side of the fragment, a nude youth stands next to a large, elongated volute krater on a high foot. The youth carries a round object, perhaps a phiale or wreath, in his left hand. The bed covering extends from the couch to the floor. At the left side of the fragment, one shod foot survives from a seated, probably female, companion. The foot, possibly in three-quarter view, projects beyond the footstool, of which traces survive. At the bottom of the fragment is a plinth (H. 0.023 m), but at right there is no frame, though it is probably obscured by the youth. The front surface is carefully finished. The bottom and sides are dressed with a claw chisel, the back is roughly picked. Ca. 350 B.C.

This is one of a number of votive reliefs at Corinth that represent a banqueting hero, usually depicted as an older man.195Of the many "Totenmahlreliefs" known, it is most comparable to

one in Paris (Louvre Ma 745), dated ca. 350 B.C. by Thoenges-Stringaris,which contains, in addition, a snake rising to eat the food on the table and a wreath held in the hero's left hand.196 It is also similar to a relief in Berlin from Boiotia, though the latter has a stiffer rendering, and one in Samos, dated ca. 300 B.C., which appears to be of somewhat later date than our piece.197 Concentrations of hero reliefs have been found elsewhere in the city-in the vicinity of the South Stoa, the Babbius Monument, and the Archaeological Museum.198This relief may have been carried into the Theater from another part of the city.

194. CorinthX, pp. 140-141, fig. 138, Type XXIII. Broneer notes that the same type of Aphrodite appearson lamps of the 2nd century A.C.

195. On "Totenmahlreliefs"from Corinth, see ThoengesStringaris1965, nos. 49, 183-185; Dentzer 1982, nos. R 245255, figs. 498-508. Some fragmentaryexamples from Corinth are of about the same date, e.g., Thoenges-Stringaris1965, nos. 183, 184 (= Corinth S-322: CorinthIX, no. 263; Broneer 1942, fig. 1); Philadelpheus1921,p. 1, fig. 1;Thoenges-Stringaris1965, no. 185 (= Corinth1-1024),which Kent (CorinthVIII,iii, no. 34, pl. 4) dates late 3rd centuryB.C. on letter forms, and ThoengesStringaris, ca. 300 B.C.

196.Thoenges-Stringaris1965,p. 74, no. 41, pl. 13:3.Dentzer (1982, pp. 334, 454, no. R 471, fig. 692) warnsagainst expecting the vases on these reliefs to compare too closely to the development of real vases. Thoenges-Stringaris1965, no. 49 (= Corinth S-2632) also lacks the snake; see Robinson and Weinberg 1960, p. 235, pl. 60:a, late 4th to early 3rd century B.C. 197. Berlin,StaatlicheMuseen826:Dentzer 1982,no. R97 a, fig. 363; Thoenges-Stringaris1965, no. 122. Samos:SamosXII, no. 136 (= no. 106), pl. 68. 198. On hero cults near the South Stoa, see Broneer 1942; and Williams1978, pp. 30-34.

VOTIVE RELIEFS WITH NO FIND LOCATION P1. 69:f Fragmentary votive relief from former marbles found S-3482. Theater, among Theater excavations, 1928 (Corinth NB 321, p. 580). P.H. 0.047, p.W. 0.089, Th. 0.037 m. Single fragment; broken all around and at back. Marble, white, fine to medium grained. The relief preserves a draped female figure in frontal view, broken through the neck, upper torso, and left wrist. The shoulders are parallel to the relief ground, but the head faced three-quarters proper left. The break at the upper left suggests that the hair was of medium length. The figure wore a peplos; there is no sign of a mantle. The left arm was held out from the torso and raised to the side, as if in a gesture of greeting or adoration toward a figure at right, in which case the right break above the wrist may reflect the position of the hand. The forearm is raised too high for the figure to be holding a patera and not high enough to be adjusting her hair or raising her mantle, gestures that are common on votive reliefs.199 4th century B.C., based on type and style.

83

199

PI. 69:g, h Face from votive relief T-100a. Theater, Shear's excavations. P.L. 0.080, p.W. head 0.046, p.D. head at nose 0.040, W. face at temples 0.034 m. Single fragment; head broken from relief ground through midcrown, side of face, and around base of chin. Missing chips from hair, forehead, and face; weathered and discolored. Marble, white, fine grained; micaceous; Pentelic. The face and small portions of hair from a figure in right profile. Centrally parted hair frames a rectangular forehead of medium height. The large eye is flat, set off by clearly articulated lids, the upper one long. The nose is full; the short, fleshy mouth turns down into the full, even cheeks and firm chin. The left half of the face is only sketchily rendered, suggesting that the head was in 84

profile. 4th century B.C.

The proportions and style of 84 recall both funerary and votive reliefs of the 4th century B.C., but the size is more indicative of a votive relief, of which examples in various sizes survive at Corinth.200The piece resembles the faces of women and could represent a worshiper, though a deity also seems possible.201The profile view may make a worshiper more likely, as on the relief of Telephanes from Pentelikon in Athens.202 For a face of similar proportions, compare the helmeted head of a warrior on a metope from the Argive Heraion.203 199. Neumann 1979, figs. 24:a (second figure from right), 27:a (second figure from left), 25:b,37:b.Cf.also Edwards1985. 200. Cf. CorinthIX,pp. 126-130, nos. 263-271;Williams1978, pp. 28-30. 201. Cf. a graverelief in Athens, NM 870: Karouzou1968, p.

109, pl. 40:a,the girl at left, dated afterthe mid4th centuryB.C. 202. Athens, NM 4465: Karouzou1968, pp. 91-92, pl. 36. 203. For Athens, NM 1573, from the Argive Heraion, see ArgiveHeraeumI, pp. 146-148, pl. 30; LIMCI, p. 613, no. 419, s.v.Amazones(Devambez).

10

MISCELLANEOUS

S

PIECES

hear's excavations of the 1920s were also carried out northeast of the Theater. Some of the

pieces presented here were found in a house with a mosaic floor that has come to be called the Mosaic House. Others were found east of East Theater Street, in the west parodos, or outside the complex. They are presented here in roughly chronological order, the larger figures first.

Included are ten figures: three from relativelylarge sculptures (85-87) and four from statuettes (88-91), with one fragment from a votive relief (92), one from a sarcophagus (93), and one (94)

brought in from nearby.' Among the larger figures, two heads are probablyof Hellenistic date (85, 86). The same may be true of some of the statuettes. Thematically,there is a certain correspondence between the better-preservedfigures and subjectsrepresented within the Theater complex-in depictions of Dionysos (85, 94), Herakliskos (86), and Aphrodite (91, 92[?]). LARGE-SCALE SCULPTURES (85-87) 85

Head of Dionysos P1. 70 T-1044/Sc. 77. East of East Theater Street, built into a Byzantine wall east of Mosaic House, 1929 (Corinth NB 324, pp. 918, 926-927). P.H. 0.173, W. 0.147, D. 0.161, p.H. face 0.110, W. face at ears 0.093; rest. H. 1.085 m. Single fragment; head broken diagonally through neck. Missing chips from wreath, hair, eyebrows, outer surface of the nose, lips, and chin; most surfaces badly weathered and worn. Bibliography: Shear 1929, pp. 532-534, fig. 15, where identified as Naxian marble, possibly Greek or a Roman copy; Friedland 1997, p. 50, note 31. Marble, grayish white weathered a golden color, medium to large crystals (W. 0.002 m); island marble, possibly Parian. A head of Dionysos from a statue approximately twothirds life-size. Beardless and youthful, the figure wears

long hair parted in the center, pulled back in loose waves over the ears, and fastened at the nape in a thick bunch from which the hair extends down the neck.2 On each side a lock of hair hangs forward from behind the ears: on proper right it bends forward toward the shoulders, separated from the neck by a running drill; on the left it emerges farther forward and hangs straight. The hair has more volume beside the cheeks than over the crown, where chiseled grooves render the hair loose and wavy. Greater detail on the left suggests that the primary viewing angle was from three-quarters left. An ivy wreath is worn over the crown and fastened above the hair knot in back, the leaves rendered in low relief. The leaf on the right, farthest from the face, is outlined by a running drill channel. A mitra, shown as two finely incised lines, crosses the forehead, is pulled back over the crown, and is covered by the hair at left, probably to be fastened together with the wreath at back.

1. On the Mosaic House, see Shear 1928b, 1929; see Williams and Zervos 1983, pp. 14-23, fig. 3, pls. 2:a, 6, on the Roman villa in which the 4th-century B.C. mosaic was reused. 2. Friedland (1997, p. 50, note 31) identifies the bunch of hair at the nape as a "neck strut" in the manner of those seen on Roman portraits from Pamphilia. In light of this comment I have reexamined the piece with raking light and have noted grooves on both sides of this projection, crosswise on the left, lengthwise on the right; the original back surface is missing. Since the surfaces are worked and the hair is in a meaningful arrangement for the figure type-pulled into a partial bunch at the nape from which the rest hangs down-this area appears to represent hair, not a sketchily worked "neck strut." My inter-

pretation seems more likely given the apparent lack of the feature in mainland Greece and the proposed date of the Corinth piece. On neck struts, see, e.g., Inan and Rosenbaum 1966, p. 10, where the support in the form of a "neck strut" at the nape is said to appear most frequently in Pamphilia, also in Pisidian Antioch, and in isolated examples elsewhere; see their no. 36, pl. 22; no. 46, pl. 28; no. 63, pl. 40:1; no. 85, pl. 52:1; no. 124, pl. 73:4; no. 248, pl. 135:1; no. 251, pl. 138:2; and no. 263, pl. 143:1, which range in date from the Flavian to Tetrarchic periods. Notably, in none of the examples illustrated by