Dionysian Triumph Sarcophagi
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Dionysian Triumph Sarcophagi William A. G. Leveritt Thesis submitted to The University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2016 i Abstract This thesis explores the meanings of those Roman sarcophagi which show the Indian triumph of Dionysus. This group, found from approximately the early Antonine to just after the Severan period, shows the same mythological characters in similar positions and surroundings. They — together with other groups — tend to be approached from a methodology which either explicitly anticipates homogeneity of meaning or tacitly implies it through the transferral of interpretations from one piece to another. This study attempts to reconsider such actions by exposing the different effects that individual sarcophagi draw. As a group, these sarcophagi cover a period of significant change in the funerary realm. Since the group straddles important divisions between public imagery and private expression, we can more readily anticipate the latter through knowledge of the former. While studies of the triumph as ritual have begun to recognise it as a rite in flux, to be understood in its various instantiations rather than as a trans-historical event, such an analytical shift has not been applied to sarcophagi. In explicitly moving away from the assumption that we can assert genre- level meanings, this thesis undertakes an assessment sensitised to the possibil- ii ity of case-by-case variation in meaning. This approach is also recommended by the intensely personal nature of the function of the sarcophagi: as the final resting places of lost loved-ones. First, a survey of prior approaches is made. Next, the group is rigorously defined with a methodology designed not with an intent to imply ancient applicability, but rather to be explicit about the generation of a working set. Subsequently, the sarcophagi are decomposed into their constituent elements and analysed, before in the next chapter being reconstituted and their effect in collusion analysed. Finally, the group is studied as a whole and the reasons behind its development, modifications and decline explored. iii Acknowledgements I would like to express my deepest gratitudes to my supervisors, Dr Katharina Lorenz and Dr Andreas Kropp, whose erudition has only been matched by their patience at reading and re-reading the various drafts and incarnations of this work. Their kindness and encouragement have been immeasurable. I must thank my internal examiner, Dr Lynn Fotheringham, and my external examiner, Prof. Jaś Elsner, for their kindness and insight. Many staff members at Nottingham have offered helpful advice over the course of this project. I would especially like to thank Dr Mark Bradley, Dr Esther Eidinow, Dr Simon Malloch, and Prof. John Rich. For the generous donation of their time, and for their careful diligence, I would like to thank my proofreaders Danielle Frisby, Harriet Lander, Charlotte Round, Mike Welbourn and Nicholas Wilshere. I would also like to thank the community of tex.stackexchange for their advice regarding the coding of the catalogue in this work, which has probably saved me hours of frustration. Finally, it remains for me to thank my grandparents, mother, and step- father for their love and support during the course of this project, without whom it would have been impossible. This thesis is dedicated to the memories of my grandparents and my father. iv This thing, what is it in and of itself, in its own construction? What is its substance and material? What is its cause? What in the world does it do? For how much time does it exist? τοῦτο τί ἐστιν αὐτὸ καθ' αὑτὸ τῇ ἰδίᾳ κατασκευῇ, τί μὲν τὸ οὐσιῶδες αὐτοῦ καὶ ὑλικόν, τί δὲ τὸ αἰτιῶδες, τί δὲ ποιεῖ ἐν τῷ κόσμῳ, πόσον δὲ χρόνον ὑφίσταται; Marcus Aurelius Meditations 8.11. vi vii Contents List of Figures xv Abbreviations xix 1 Introduction 1 1.1 The phenomenon ......................... 2 1.1.1 The panther’s tale .................... 4 1.1.2 Does a myth always mean the same thing? ....... 8 1.2 The importance of iconography ................. 11 1.2.1 Two variables: the patron and the sculptor ....... 12 1.2.2 aemulatio ......................... 14 1.3 Prior approaches ......................... 16 1.3.1 Dionysus and his worship ................ 16 1.3.2 Sarcophagus and funerary studies ............ 18 1.3.3 The triumph ....................... 25 1.3.3.1 The rite, the mythology and the sarcophagi . 29 1.3.4 Dionysian sarcophagi ................... 30 1.3.4.1 Religion and the sarcophagi .......... 33 viii 1.4 Embracing advances, avoiding pitfalls .............. 34 1.5 Trajectory of the thesis ...................... 37 2 Defining the corpus 43 2.1 What does a triumph look like? ................. 43 2.1.1 Monumental relief .................... 44 2.1.2 Smaller-scale depictions ................. 48 2.1.3 The chariot’s form .................... 53 2.1.4 The influence of other processions ............ 54 2.2 The intersection of the imperial triumph and the Dionysian triumph .............................. 62 2.2.1 Standing up to be counted ................ 62 2.2.2 Invoking the triumph on sarcophagi: intersections, in- tentions and limitations ................. 65 2.2.2.1 Victoria ..................... 72 2.2.2.2 Ariadne ..................... 76 2.2.3 spectandi causa ...................... 77 2.3 A working model of the genre’s boundaries ........... 80 3 Analysis of motifs 89 3.1 The Chariot Group ........................ 90 3.1.1 The figure-types of Dionysus triumphator ....... 91 3.1.1.1 The significance of the averted gaze ..... 97 3.1.2 The chariot teams .................... 98 3.1.2.1 The panther series ............... 99 3.1.2.2 The elephant series .............. 101 ix 3.1.2.3 The centaur series ............... 103 3.1.3 The dangers of using motifs as diagnostic criteria ... 104 3.2 Animals in the procession .................... 105 3.2.1 The species ........................ 106 3.2.2 Animals and the exotic .................. 108 3.2.2.1 Elephants .................... 109 3.2.2.2 Lions ...................... 111 3.2.2.3 Camels and camelopards ............ 113 3.2.3 Animals and the symbolic? ............... 113 3.2.3.1 Rams and goats ................ 113 3.2.3.2 Snakes ..................... 115 3.2.3.3 Silenus’ donkeys ................ 118 3.2.4 Conclusions ........................ 121 3.3 The prisoners ........................... 123 3.3.1 Prisoners in detail .................... 125 3.3.2 The prisoner types .................... 127 3.3.3 Ethnicity ......................... 132 3.3.4 Interpretation ....................... 135 3.3.5 Conclusions ........................ 138 3.4 The cista mystica ......................... 139 3.4.1 Thinking inside the box ................. 140 3.4.2 Prior scholarship ..................... 144 3.4.3 Thinking outside the box: the cista mystica in context 145 3.4.4 A stable symbol with unstable surroundings ...... 151 3.4.5 Interpretation: orchestrating the situation ....... 154 x 3.4.6 Conclusions ........................ 156 3.5 The liknon ............................. 158 3.5.1 Definition ......................... 158 3.5.2 Dionysus liknites ..................... 159 3.5.2.1 The liknon and the afterlife .......... 161 3.5.3 The object on the sarcophagi .............. 163 3.5.3.1 Variant likna .................. 166 3.5.4 Interpretation ....................... 168 3.5.4.1 The Cambridge liknon ............. 171 3.5.4.2 The Naples liknon ............... 177 3.6 Hercules .............................. 178 3.6.1 The sober Hercules .................... 182 3.6.1.1 Interpretation ................. 189 3.6.2 The growing intoxication of Hercules .......... 189 3.6.3 The drunken Hercules .................. 191 3.6.3.1 Interpretation ................. 199 3.6.4 Conclusions: Hercules in contemporary usage ..... 201 3.7 Conclusions ............................ 204 4 Networks 205 4.1 Weighing the networks: the reliefs as wholes .......... 210 4.2 Negotiating the boundaries ................... 212 4.2.1 The portrait face ..................... 212 4.2.1.1 From collusion to dissolution ......... 220 xi 4.2.1.2 Proximising and distancing in mythological portraits .................... 222 4.2.2 Conclusions ........................ 224 4.3 Negotiating the military ..................... 225 4.3.1 The tension between idealised life and myth ...... 237 4.3.2 The tension between real life and rhetoric ....... 242 4.3.3 Conclusions ........................ 249 4.4 Negotiating the sympotic ..................... 250 4.4.1 The anatomy of revelry: the Pashley sarcophagus ... 252 4.4.2 The polyvalency of the sympotic ............ 263 4.4.3 Conclusions ........................ 267 4.5 Negotiating the personal ..................... 268 4.5.1 Divergent tones from similar motifs ........... 272 4.5.2 Conclusions ........................ 274 4.6 Negotiating the religious ..................... 276 4.6.1 Epiphaneia ........................ 279 4.6.2 The internal audience and epiphaneia .......... 282 4.6.3 Conclusions ........................ 287 4.7 Negotiating the encounter .................... 288 4.7.1 Conclusions ........................ 294 4.8 Conclusions ............................ 295 5 Synthesis 297 5.1 Points of engagement ....................... 298 xii 5.1.1 Genre-level Brücken between the sarcophagi and con- temporary viewers .................... 303 5.2 Points of disengagement ..................... 307 5.2.1 Disengaging the mythological triumph and apotheosis . 313 5.3 Rise and fall ............................ 316 5.3.1 Stemmata ........................