Records of the Canterbury Museum Volume 28 2014 EDITORS Natural History Paul Scofield Cor Vink

Human History Roger Fyfe Sarah Murray

Editor in Chief Derene Flood

Canterbury Museum gratefully acknowledges a grant from the Mason Foundation for the publication of the Records of the Canterbury Museum.

ISSN 0370 3878

RECORDS OF THE CANTERBURY MUSEUM Volume 28, 2014 Published August 2014

© Canterbury Museum Rolleston Avenue Christchurch 8013 New Zealand Canterbury Museum would like to thank both the anonymous peer reviewers and the following people for acting as referees on papers submitted for this volume:

Emma Brooks Ulf R Hansson Research Manager Senior Research Fellow Department of Anthropology and Archaeology Department of Classics Otago University The University of Texas at Austin PO Box 56 2210 Speedway, Stop C3400 Dunedin 9054 Austin NEW ZEALAND Texas 78712-1738 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Barbara Burrell Associate Professor of Classics Dr Andreas J M Kropp Department of Classics Department of Classics University of Cincinnati University of Nottingham Field Director, Promontory Palace Excavations at Nottingham NG7 2RD Caesarea Maritima ENGLAND 410 Blegen Library PO Box 210226 Dr Phil Sirvid Cincinnati, Ohio 45221 Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PO Box 467 Wellington 6140 Dr Kate Ezra NEW ZEALAND Yale University Art Gallery PO Box 20827 New Haven Connecticut 06510 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Dr Volker Framenau Phoenix Environmental Sciences 1/511 Wanneroo Road Balcatta Western Australia 6021 AUSTRALIA

Contents

1. Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 7 ROGER FYFE AND SARAH MURRAY

2. Chasing the Sun: Coinage and Solar Worship in the Roman Empire of the Third 31 and Early Fourth Centuries CE DANIELLE STEYN

3. Funerary Portrait Of A Palmyrene Priest 49 DR LUCY WADESON

4. The type specimen ofArgiope leucopicta Urquhart, 1890 (Araneae: Araneidae) 61 COR J VINK

Instructions for Authors 64

Records of the Canterbury Museum, 2014 Vol. 28: 7-29 © Canterbury Museum 2014

Benin Art in Canterbury Museum ROGER FYFE Canterbury Museum, Rolleston Avenue, Christchurch 8013, New Zealand [email protected]

SARAH MURRAY Canterbury Museum, Rolleston Avenue, Christchurch 8013, New Zealand [email protected]

ABSTRACT ethnographic collector William Downing Webster back Canterbury Museum cares for 16 items of nineteenth to the conquest of Benin in early 1897 by the British century and one early twentieth century example Punitive Expedition. The Expedition, which resulted of Benin art. This paper offers the first published in the destruction of the city and the exile of its King, description of this collection, presenting a looted great works of art from the city which were straightforward illustrated catalogue with a brief later auctioned to defray costs; an activity then seen description of the individual pieces as well as their to be a legitimate prerogative of a punitive expedition. acquisition history and provenance.1 A short historical Thousands of Benin art and ethnographic objects, and political overview together with a narrative through government and private sales, soon found their placing Benin art within an indigenous context are way into museum and personal collections throughout also included to ensure the ethnographic perspective the United Kingdom, Europe and America. A lesser of the objects complements their descriptions. This number of items of Benin art were also solicited by addition to the body of literature related to Benin art museums throughout the British Empire, no doubt will alert international scholars to the existence of the prompted in part by feelings of patriotic emotion and Canterbury Museum collection, allowing it to become a tendency of colonial museums to mimic collecting a more academically active and accessible part of the patterns of large international institutions such as large, but finite, worldwide corpus of Benin art. the British Museum. While the majority of items in Canterbury Museum’s collection were obtained KEY WORDS around the turn of the twentieth century, an additional Benin; collection. acquisition in 2005 of a bronze commemorative head further developed the museum collections artistic and INTRODUCTION historical context of this genre. Canterbury Museum cares for the largest collection of nineteenth century Benin art in any public collection The British Punitive Expedition, while led by in Australia or New Zealand.2 The provenance of the British military, attracted attention throughout most items can be securely traced through the English the world. Newspapers in New Zealand kept readers 8 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

informed of activities in Benin with sensational seat of elaborate court institutions. At the political headlines such as ‘A Horrible Place’ and ‘The Niger and religious apex of the kingdom was a semi-divine Expedition – Capture of Benin – Human Sacrifices’.3 king, the oba, supported by three groups of chiefs: otu The expedition stayed in the news for months with (appointees to the palace), eghaebho n’ore (appointed more detailed, but no less gruesome, eye witness town officials) anduzama (senior hereditary chiefs). accounts of the campaign. These accounts justified the The bureaucracy, organised on the basis of both destruction of Benin in a variety of ways. ‘The Benin hereditary authority (oba and uzuma) and achievement Expedition – The Story of one of the Party’ drew, for through promotion by the oba, was a sophisticated example, on the practice of human sacrifice to validate political system with constitutional checks and the Expedition: balances. Theuzama were excluded from political office but delegated the authority as ‘king-makers’ Then we came to an open glade, and there was a most on the death of an oba and the iyase (the senior town revolting sight – a human sacrifice of a young girl chief) entrusted with responsibility to act as a check on disemboweled, her arms tied behind her, and a stick excesses by the monarch.6 Queen mothers (Iye Oba) driven through her cheeks as a gag. It turned me sick… have played a conspicuous role in Benin court life for at That sight put an end to any nervousness I felt, and I least four hundred years and are traditionally the only simply thirsted for blood and vengeance.4 women who have had a voice in administration and politics. Iye Oba live in a separate court on the outskirts Over a year after the conclusion of the Expedition, of Benin city. They are customarily consulted by the Canterbury’s daily newspaper The Pressstill claimed it oba on all state affairs. However direct contact with was fresh in the minds of its readers and congratulated their son is ‘officially’ forbidden and all communication Canterbury Museum on obtaining, for its collection, is conducted through messengers. Within their own valuable examples of the booty taken from Benin.5 court Iya Oba have ascribed rights, responsibilities and privileges and effectively perform a role comparable to Over the twentieth century, worldwide collections that of a high ranking chief. After his mother’s death, of Benin art became the focus of an ever growing her son erects an altar in her memory in his palace. corpus of research, exhibition and scholarly These altars are usually decorated with rattle staffs, publication. Yet, few scholars are aware of the existence commemorative heads, and rectangular cast brass/ of the small but important collection of Benin art bronze altarpieces depicting figures representing the held by Canterbury Museum. As a result, this paper Iye Oba and her court attendants. Theoba customarily contextualises these items within the history of Benin holds an annual commemorative service at his and an understanding of its art before examining how mother’s altar and offers sacrifices in her memory.7 these items made their way to Canterbury Museum. It Many elements of the sophisticated political system, concludes with an illustrated catalogue of the Benin Art the hierarchical structure of society and complex held by this institution. belief systems of Benin are clearly reflected in the art associated with the court and bureaucracy. HISTORICAL AND POLITICAL OVERVIEW OF THE KINGDOM OF BENIN When Portuguese explorers first reached Benin in Today, Benin City is the capital of the Edo state of about 1490 they found a flourishing kingdom. Trade Nigeria, located on a rolling coastal plain on the west and treaties, entered into on an equal-sovereign-nation coast of Africa, with the River Niger running along basis, saw generally successful relations develop. The its southern border. The Kingdom of Benin (known Portuguese were to be the first of a succession of as Edo to its inhabitants) represents the oldest extant European explorers and traders woven through the monarchy in Africa and appears to have reached its history of Benin. Dutch migrants visited Benin from territorial apogee before the arrival of Europeans. A the first half of the seventeenth century, followed by the highly centralised kingdom was established sometime French in the eighteenth century and the British in the in the fourteenth century with political authority nineteenth century.8 By the mid-nineteenth century the based in the capital city Benin, which was also the political and economic fortunes of Benin were in slow Fyfe and Murray – Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 9

decline. The British, who had established the adjacent The royal palace was considered the centre of the British Protectorate of Nigeria viewed Benin as an Benin world and a focal point of social aspirations. It obstacle to their expansion into the agricultural interior. is evident from travelers’ accounts how impressive and When a substantial, but largely unarmed, diplomatic highly decorated it was. Accounts of members of the envoy in transit to Benin city, determined to undertake British Punitive Expedition reveal that doors, lintels negotiations with the oba, was ambushed and killed and rafters of the council chamber andoba’s residence in 1896 (recorded as a massacre by the British media), were lined with sheets of repousse decorated brass the response was a military punitive expedition against covered with royal geometric designs and figures of the kingdom.9 The British Punitive Expedition of 1897 men and leopards. Doors were fitted with ivory locks set fire to the residences of the Queen mother and and surrounded with carved ivory figurines.12 The large important chiefs which rapidly spread, destroying most number of bronze/brass plaques fitted to the pillars in of the city. The royal palace, sacred sites and homes the Oba’s audience hall added to this visual narrative of the chiefs were looted. The capture of the city and with scenes designed to evoke recognition of both ritual subsequent exile of Oba Ovoranmwen marked the end and historical subjects and calculated as an impressive of Benin as an independent kingdom and the beginning public display for foreigners, palace officials and of an era of enormous social, political and, of course, commoners alike. Impressive commemorative bronze/ artistic change.10 The British conquest of Benin not only brass heads, most of which supported elephant tusks resulted in the dispersal of much of the nation’s artistic intricately carved with ritual and historical narratives heritage, but the once independent warrior kingdom (often related to the individual being depicted), were was incorporated into the wider political framework of placed on adjacent shrines and ancestral altars. The the British Protectorate of Nigeria and later the modern palace was also the centre of ritual activities aimed at Nigerian state. The royal and bureaucratic patronage of ensuring the well-being and prosperity of the nation. bronze working and other artistic works all but ceased An annual cycle of both private and public rituals were leaving those skilled artisans who wished to continue held within the confines of the palace and adjacent little choice other than to operate on an itinerant basis. shrines. Guild artists including carvers, casters, weavers and leatherworkers were required to provide regalia and THE ART OF BENIN IN CONTEXT ritual objects to be used in the ceremonies. While the western world appreciated Benin art for its aesthetic appeal, it is important to recognise that items Although villages were mainly agricultural some of Benin art were considered to be ritual objects or did specialise in crafts such as pottery, carpentry, iron historical artefacts by those that created them. Primarily, working and mask making; this work was undertaken such art was created for the oba who lived in a palace for their local community rather than the oba. Men compound covering several hectares. The complex had access to a greater range of artistic activities included meeting chambers for various groups of chiefs, than women in Benin. Because religious strictures storehouses, shrines, work areas for ritual specialists and prevented women artisans handling metal or metal royal craftsmen as well as residences for theoba’s wives. tools their participation was restricted to the weaver’s Each of the craft guilds was located in a specific ward and guild. The reverse was not the case however and men had a specific service to perform for theoba. Among these could also be weavers. Regardless of the medium in guilds were the craftsmen who produced brass, bronze, which they worked guild artists saw themselves as ivory and wood sculpture, embroidered cloth and leather possessing a body of forms and patterns that belonged fans for the oba, and, with an indulgence from the oba, for to them and defined them as artists. Each guild shared the chiefs and priests throughout the kingdom. In reality a belief that the supernatural world was the ultimate these artisans were dependent on royal patronage and they source of their designs and while they worked artists cast, carved, forged and wove prestigious regalia for the constantly invoked divine beings for favour, guidance oba and officials associated with the royal court. Almost and protection. Many of the designs also include all the art produced by guild artists remained within the iconographic motifs identified as associated only with palace compound and was exhibited in association with the royal court. palace buildings, shrines and rituals.11 10 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

Not all the questions relating to the origin of brass/ as a scientist of considerable ability and versatility, bronze casting in Benin have yet been resolved. There is but his role in the acquisition of the Benin collection general agreement, however, that the practice of casting also reveals he possessed an astute awareness of wider precedes European contact and that both the artistic curatorial interests and knowledge.14 It appears likely expression and technical excellence of Benin castings that Hutton was influenced by both a legacy of personal are substantially the result of indigenous development. involvement through his service in British military The only external fillip to the process appears to have campaigns in Crimea and India and by a strong sense of been the result of access to brass/bronze from European professional duty to expand the encyclopedic collections sources. Although many of the earliest dated pieces being accumulated by Canterbury Museum. are made of bronze (an alloy mainly of copper and tin), most Benin sculpture tested so far has proven to Hutton’s report to the Board of Governors of the be brass (an alloy of copper and zinc). Tin is found Canterbury College for 1899 indicates that “the most locally in Nigeria but copper is not, so to make the important addition” for the year preceding was “a early bronzes Benin must have had an existing external collection of objects from Benin City”.15 While his report trading network before European contact. The logical signifies that objects were obtained by purchase, there explanation for the apparent move to brass as the is no indication of the source. In the same report, principle alloy used seems to involve the availability of and that of the previous year, Hutton recorded that brass trade manillas and also neptunes (brass pans) and exchanges had been concluded with various museums other brass objects which were manufactured in Europe and individuals including Mr W D Webster of Oxford.16 and traded to West Africa from as early as the sixteenth Webster, who became an ethnographic collector and century. Since 1897 there have been many attempts by dealer soon after 1890, travelled throughout Britain colonial officials, historians, and anthropologists to buying from auction houses and by purchase or resolve the issue of whether the origin of copper alloy exchange from private collectors, especially members casting techniques have indigenous African or foreign of the armed forces recently returned from abroad. origins. Most indigenous oral traditions seem to favour Webster bought and sold extensively, supplying large local African technological development. Irrespective numbers of objects to many of the major collections of this discussion the copper alloy castings of ancient both in Britain and around the world. It is clear from Benin are regarded as amongst the finest examples of Hutton’s reports that Webster was also willing to the lost wax casting technique in the world and have engage in exchange transactions, presumably acting been greatly admired as aesthetic masterpieces since as a middle man in order to obtain objects to mutually their arrival in the west in 1897.13 satisfy client’s requests.17 Although no original correspondence between Hutton and Webster has Canterbury Museum’s collection of Benin art survived it is clear from Hutton’s annual reports that comprises an interesting cross-section of both secular the two were concluding transactions, by both purchase and ritual objects ranging from small personal items and exchange, from at least as early as 1897.18 Given to spectacular altar objects rendered in a variety the enormous demand in Britain, Europe and America of materials. The artistic quality of each of the for the newly available supply of Benin art returned seventeen pieces, their potential cultural and historical to England from the British Punitive Expedition, it significance and the story which took them some is highly likely that Webster would be in a position 16,000 kilometers from their home, is such that they to demand ‘purchase only’ transactions for these are worthy of documentation as a contribution to the items. Records show that Webster marked the objects corpus of literature relating to Benin art. he acquired using white ink in a distinctive hand. These marks survive on most of the Benin art objects ACQUISITION, PROVENANCE AND DISPLAY acquired by Canterbury Museum and it therefore seems All but one of the pieces of Benin art were acquired reasonable to assume these items were, at least for a during the directorship of Canterbury Museum by time, in Webster’s possession.19 Captain Frederick Wollaston Hutton around the turn of Twelve items of Benin art can be confirmed as the twentieth century. Hutton is remembered primarily having been purchased by Hutton at an auction in Fyfe and Murray – Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 11

London in 1898.20 Although each item would have the city of Benin”.23 This commemorative head Fig 13: had a specific historical and ritual significance within (EA 1977.468) also appears to have been purchased the environs of the royal court, the abrupt manner in from Webster in 1899 and certainly indicates the level which they were removed resulted in the loss of such of Hutton’s commitment and determination to acquire unique and intimate records. The Canterbury Museum what might be considered as a representative collection Foreign Ethnology Register records that these objects of Benin art.24 were purchased from Webster at an auction in London on 30 August 1898. However, the situation of their Acquisitions of Benin art by Hutton over the purchase was slightly more complicated than this. As next five years confirm this aspiration. Two items, a result of poor business turnover Webster had been, Fig 14: bronze knife handle (EA 1976.771) and Fig by necessity, forced to sell much of his stock to Stevens 15: carved ivory ‘clapper’ (EA 1976.778) are recorded - the major London auctioneer in ethnographic and in the Foreign Ethnology Register as having been natural history specimens. The material, noted as being acquired at an auction in London on 2 March 1901.25 sourced from Webster, was in fact sold by Stevens over The entry for each object also records a reference to five days in November 1898. Lots 661-690, sold on 30 the relevant Webster catalogue in which they appear; November (not 30 August as recorded in Canterbury catalogue 21:23 and (Volume 2) catalogue 24:27 Museum’s Ethnology Register Book 1) consisted of respectively. Surprisingly neither of these items was Benin material.21 recorded by Hutton in his annual reports to the Board of Governors of the Canterbury College and it is The twelve items acquired by Canterbury Museum therefore not possible to know if they were acquired at this auction include Fig 1: brass bell (EA 1976.772); by purchase or exchange. The final acquisition of Fig 2: bronze wall plaque (EA 1977.470); Fig 3: amulet Benin art by Hutton, Fig 16: commemorative head in the form of an adze (EA 1977.204); Fig 4: amulet (EA 1977.469), has a somewhat more interesting with surface decoration in the form of an adze (EA story. In his report to the Board of Governors of 1977.211); Fig 5: ivory figure from a sacrificial altar Canterbury College in 1905 Hutton records two (EA 1977.203); Fig 6: small ivory carved head (EA seemingly unrelated pieces of information. Amongst 1977.191); Fig 7: small bronze figure of a warrior (EA ‘exchanges received’ he acknowledges Mr O E Yanson 1977.192); Fig 8: heavy brass bracelet (EA 1977.165); (sic: Oliver Erichson Janson) of London and under Fig 9: bone armlet (EA 1977.166); Fig 10: brass bracelet “Ethnological Collections” he notes, “A bronze mask (EA 1977.167); Fig 11: bird of prophecy sculpture from from Benin City”.26 It appears probable that Webster, apex of Chief’s staff (EA 1976 .775); and Fig 12: ivory whose distinctive marking is visible on the work, was war horn (EA 1976.779). In his report to the Board also once the owner of this commemorative head. In of Governors in 1900 Hutton referred collectively to 1904 Stevens’ conducted a further sale of items sourced this acquisition “as the most important addition” to from the Webster collection and it appears that Janson the Ethnological Room, but apparently only regarded acquired the commemorative head from this auction.27 one object “a large bronze placque” (sic), as worthy An examination of the Canterbury Museum Exchange of individual description.22 Hutton’s expression of Book, 1899 to 1912, failed to reveal the connection preferential focus simply reflected a universal bias between Janson and the Benin mask. However an entry amongst collectors and museums. The most desirable in the Canterbury Museum Accession Book, 1891 items of Benin art were bronze wall plaques and bronze to 1933 records the entry on 6 July 1902 of a ‘Bronze commemorative heads; Hutton was clearly keen to Mask from Benin City, Exchange, from O E Yanson for acquire representative examples of each, despite obvious moa skeleton’.28 Although this particular entry should financial constraints, to continue theencyclopedic have been recorded in the exchange book, rather than collecting ambitions of Canterbury Museum initiated the accession book, it seems to have been a simple by the first director Sir Julius von Haast. In that same administrative error rather than an attempt to conceal report to the Governors of Canterbury College in any more sinister motive. Transactions between O E 1900 Hutton records a further purchase of “a very fine Janson and Hutton continued until Hutton’s untimely ‘mask’, being the support for an elephant’s tusk, from death in 1905.29 12 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

The most recently acquired item in the Canterbury initiated a rearrangement of the display because the Museum collection, Fig 17: a second commemorative wording of the entry for Case 36 in the third edition of head, (2005.12.1), is thought to have been made in The Guide to the Collections in the Canterbury Museum the period 1900 to 1910 but, with the absence of was changed to read… ‘A ‘mask’, used as a support for comparative examples, it has not yet been possible an Elephant’s tusk, is placed each side of the door leading to confirm this. A private vendor acquired the item to the New Zealand Room’.33 The remaining text of the in or about 1980 from a dealer in Lagos, Nigeria entry remains otherwise unchanged from the 1900 and subsequently brought the item with him to edition. New Zealand when he emigrated from England. It was purchased by Canterbury Museum in 2005. The items of Benin art remained on continuous This commemorative head is of particular historical display in this configuration until all galleries were significance because it appears to belong to the period systematically upgraded under the directorship of Dr immediately following the disbandment of royal Roger Duff in the 1940s. Subsequently the Benin art patronage of Benin art. collection has featured in the Canterbury Museum exhibition programme at intermittent intervals. Two The examples of Benin art acquired by Canterbury items (a commemorative head (EA 1977.469) and a Museum were rapidly incorporated into prominent plaque (EA 1977.470)) were loaned for an exhibition display locations within the exhibition galleries. The titled Eye of the Sun at the Dowse Art Museum, Lower second edition of The Guide to the Collections in the Hutt, between December 1985 and September 1986 Canterbury Museum published in June 1900, records and the two commemorative heads (EA 1977.468 and the presence of the newly acquired Benin collection in EA 1977.469) featured in an article titled ‘Ancient the African section of the Ethnological Room.30 The Craftsmen of West Africa’ in a popular series known entry discussing the Benin art wonderfully encapsulates as Museum Pieces in the local newspaper The Press. and conveys the prevailing Victorian social attitudes No complete list of the collection has as yet featured in towards indigenous African peoples: any scholarly publication with wider distribution and readership.34 While this emphasis on presenting the Case 36….Bronze ‘mask’, used as a support for an Benin art collection to a local audience is one of the Elephant’s tusk. When the City of Benin was captured primary functions of Canterbury Museum, sadly the by the British in 1897, a number of bronzes were found collection has been essentially invisible to international in the King’s house, quite different to any other known scholars and therefore a wider audience. bronzes, many of them showing a high state of art. Native tradition says that they were made by a white CONCLUSION man called Ahammangiwa, when Esige was King. He While Canterbury Museum’s collection is numerically taught several natives who made inferior imitations. small by international standards, the secure provenance Twelve Kings have reigned since Esige, which would of the items highlights the potential contribution they give his date at about the middle of the sixteenth offer to the growing artistic and historical understanding century, and this coincides with the evidence of the of the worldwide corpus of Benin art. The proactive bronzes themselves. No doubt these bronzes bear acquisition of the Benin collection by Curator Captain distinct traces of European influences. The difficulty Frederick Wollaston Hutton also suggests a number is that no works of equal merit have been found in of related areas of potentially enlightening research Portugal. At all events they show a high degree of skill relating to late nineteenth century colonial behaviour not merely in design, but also in the process of casting, and museological practice. One factor that seems to for they have been first modeled in wax (see also the have influenced acquisition decisions appears to have next case).31 been a colonial sense of belonging within the British Empire. New Zealand newspapers certainly kept readers Case 37 clearly contained the remaining items from up to date on the salient developments in what became Benin and states briefly, “Specimens from Benin City”.32 commonly known as ‘the scramble for Africa’ as European The arrival of a second bronze ‘mask’ in 1904 clearly nations competed for colonial territories across the Fyfe and Murray – Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 13

continent. If this was so, the acquisition of objects from Barbara Plankensteiner (ed), Benin Kings and Rituals: Benin would appeal not only on intrinsic grounds, but Court Acts from Nigeria, (Vienna: Kunsthistorisches also as tangible evidence of one of the last chapters of Museum and Snoek Publishers, 2007). British Empire building. The authors hope that this 12 Ling Roth, pp 157-192. paper will increase awareness of, access to and interest 13 For a wider discussion, see Peter Junge ‘Age in the Canterbury Museum collection of Benin art and Determination of Commemorative Heads: The Example act as a gateway for inclusion of the collection into of the Benin Collection’ in Plankensteiner, pp 185-197; future research and exhibition programmes involving Timothy Garrard ‘Benin Metal-Casting Technology’ in this genre. The authors also hope that in some small Ben-Amos and Rubin, pp 17-20. way this paper offers a fitting tribute to the obas, chiefs, 14 Born in England, Hutton served three years in the artists and ritual specialists of Benin without whom such Indian Mercantile Marine before studying applied science magnificent art could never have been created and that at King’s College, London. He went on to serve, as an this publication will help preserve information relating ensign, in the Royal Welsh Fusiliers during the Crimean to their art and culture both for their descendants and War and the Indian War of 1857-58. Following his return also for a wide general audience. to England, in about 1860, he rose to the rank of captain, a title by which he was later known in New Zealand. In END NOTES 1866 Hutton resigned his commission and travelled to 1 The authors would like to thank Dr Lissant Bolton, New Zealand. He soon joined the colonial government Keeper Oceanic, Africa and the Americas, British Museum Geological Survey team and later undertook a variety and Hannah Thomas, Anthropology Library and Research of work at the University of Otago, Otago Museum and Centre, British Museum for their prompt and helpful Canterbury College. On the death of Canterbury Museum’s assistance with information relating to the W D Webster first Director, Sir Julius von Haast, in 1887 Hutton acted catalogues, Dr David Dorward for his initial assessment of as interim Curator of Canterbury Museum until the the collection in 1995 and Nicolas Boigelot of Canterbury appointment of Henry Forbes in late 1888. In turn Hutton Museum for his excellent photography. succeeded Forbes as Curator of Canterbury Museum in 2 D Dorward, ‘The Royal Art of Benin in the Antipodes’, 1892. In 1905 Hutton took leave to visit England but died Unpublished exhibition proposal, Related Documents: on the return voyage in October of the same year. For a Ethnology, Canterbury Museum, 1995, p 2-4. comprehensive biography of Hutton see Elliot W Dawson, 3 North Otago Times, 19 April 1897, p 4; Otago Witness, 4 F W Hutton (1836-1905) Pioneer New Zealand Naturalist: March 1897, p 13. A Bibliography and Taxonomic Analysis, Occasional 4 Evening Post, 21 May 1897, p 2. Papers of the Hutton Foundation, (New Zealand, Hutton 5 The Press, 30 August 1898, pp 4, 6. Foundation, 1994). 6 P Girshick Ben-Amos, The Art of Benin, (London, The 15 The Canterbury College Annual Report, 1899, British Museum Press, 1995), pp 12-14. Canterbury Museum, p 13. 7 P Ben-Amos and A Rubin (eds), The Art of Power, the 16 Ibid; The Canterbury College Annual Report, 1898. Power of Art: Studies in Benin Iconography, (California, 17 For a comprehensive biography of Webster see H Museum of Cultural History, 1983), pp 79-83. Waterfield and J C H King, Provenance: Twelve Collectors 8 For a comprehensive narrative of European contact see of Ethnographic Art in England, 1760-1990, (London, Paul A Ryder, Benin and the Europeans, 1485-1897, (London, Holberton Publishing, 2009), pp 55-64. Longman Green & Co 1969). See also H Ling Roth, Great 18 Hutton neglected to record those transactions made by Benin: It’s Customs, Art and Horrors, (London, Routledge & exchange in the relevant Canterbury Museum exchange Keegan Paul, 1903 Edition Reassure 1968), pp 1-17. books, which now makes it impossible to know what was 9 This point has been disputed in other accounts, see, for sent to Webster in exchange for the items received. example, Robert Home, City of Blood Revisited: A New 19 In 1895 Webster began to produce and sell illustrated Look at the Benin Expedition of 1897, (London, R Collings, ethnographic catalogues. It is quite obvious that not all 1982). items acquired by Webster were listed in his catalogues 10 Ben-Amos (1995), p 58. prior to sale and therefore, in this way, the ‘stock’ number 11 Ben-Amos (1995), pp 1-19; Ben-Amos (1983) pp 13-16; on an individual object does not appear as a number in 14 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

the published catalogues. A set of copies of the original 35 See Phillip J C Dark, An Introduction to Benin Art and Webster catalogues for the years in question (1897-1898) Technology, (London, Clarendon Press, 1973), Plate 26, p are held by the Horniman Museum in London and a 111; Augustus Pitt-Rivers, Antique Works of Art from Benin check of the numbers believed to have been applied by (London, Privately Printed, 1900), Plate 16, illustration 94 Webster to the items in the Canterbury Museum confirms and 95, p 33. that they do not correspond to numbered items in the 36 Dark, p7. Webster catalogues, at least for the relevant years. See 37 Stylistically similar to a head illustrated by Pitt-Rivers, Webster Volume 2, Catalogues 11-17, 1897-1898; Volume Plate 16, illustration 96 and 97, p 33. 3, catalogues 18-23, 1898-1899 Volume 4, catalogues 24-27, 38 Dark, p 7. 1900, Volume 5, catalogues 28-31, 1901. 39 See illustrated in Ben-Amos (1995), plate 22, p 36. 20 Canterbury Museum Foreign Ethnology Register (Book 40 See Pitt-Rivers, plate 29, illustration 202 to 209, p 59; 1), Canterbury Museum, pp 252, 256. Ben-Amos (1995), plate 76, p 97. 21 Waterfield and King, pp 57-58. 41 See Ben-Amos (1995), plate 70, p 89. 22 The Canterbury College Annual Report, 1900, 42 Stylistically similar to an example illustrated by Pitt- Canterbury Museum, p 13. Rivers, plate 46, illustration 356 and 357, p 93. See also 23 Ibid, p 15. Kate Ezra, Royal Art of Benin: The Perls Collection in the 24 Canterbury Museum Foreign Ethnology Register (Book Metropolitan Museum of Art, (New York, Metropolitan 2), Canterbury Museum, p 8. Museum of Art, 1992), pp 197-207; Ben-Amos (1995), 25 Canterbury Museum Foreign Ethnology Register (Book illustration 82, p 103. 1), Canterbury Museum, pp 251, 255. 43 Dorward, p 6. 26 Edward Wesley Janson, an entomologist and a dealer, was 44 For a full review of bracelets see Ezra, pp 175-189. also the curator of collections of the Entomological Society 45 Ibid. of London between 1850 and 1863 and then became 46 See Ezra, pp 97-101; Pitt-Rivers, plate 25, illustration 73, librarian until 1874. He started his natural history business 74, 75; plate 37, illustration 346, 347, p 37. with his son Oliver Erichson Janson in 1850 (O E Janson & 47 See Ezra, pp 215-223. Son), selling books and specimens. The Canterbury College 48 Ibid, pp 175-189. Annual Report, 1905, Canterbury Museum, p 13. 49 Ben-Amos (1995), p 98. 27 Waterfield and King, p 58. 28 Canterbury Museum Accession Book, 1891 to 1933, REFERENCES Canterbury Museum, p 65. 29 The annual report for 1905 written by Acting Curator PRIMARY SOURCES Charles Chilton reported that Hutton had “ordered from Canterbury Museum Accession Book, 1891 to 1933, Messers. Janson & Son, some insect cabinets and collections Canterbury Museum of foreign insects; these being prepared and will be sent out Canterbury Museum Foreign Ethnology Register (Book later on; by arrangement with Messers Janson & Son they 1), Canterbury Museum have been paid for partly in cash and partly in duplicate Dorward, D, ‘The Royal Art of Benin in the Antipodes’, specimens of natural history”. The Canterbury College Unpublished exhibition proposal, Related Annual Report, 1905, Canterbury Museum, p 12. Documents: Ethnology, Canterbury Museum, 1995. 30 Frederick W Hutton, Guide to the Collections in the Evening Post Canterbury Museum, Second Edition, (Christchurch, North Otago Times Lyttelton Times, 1900). The Canterbury College Annual Report, 1898 – 1899, 31 Ibid, p 181. 1905. 32 Ibid, p 182. The Press 33 Edgar Waite, Guide to the Collections in the Canterbury Webster Catalogues, Volumes 2-5, Horniman Museum, Museum, Third Edition, (Christchurch, T E Fraser Printer, London 1906), pp 161-162. 34 Sally Burrage, ‘Ancient Craftsmen of West Africa’,Press, 28 January 1984, p 10. Fyfe and Murray – Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 15

SECONDARY SOURCES Ben-Amos, P Girshick, The Art of Benin, (London, The British Museum Press, 1995). Ben-Amos, P and Rubin A, The Art of Power, the Power of Art: Studies in Benin Iconography, Monograph, (California, Museum of Cultural History, 1983). Dark, Phillip J C, An Introduction to Benin Art and Technology, (London, Clarendon Press, 1973) Dawson, Elliot W, F W Hutton (1836-1905) Pioneer New Zealand Naturalist: A Bibliography and Taxonomic Analysis, Occasional Papers of the Hutton Foundation, (New Zealand, Hutton Foundation, 1994). Ezra, Kate, Royal Art of Benin: The Perls Collection in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, (New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1992). Home, Robert, City of Blood Revisited: A New Look at the Benin Expedition of 1897, (London, R Collings, 1982). Hutton, Frederick W, Guide to the Collections in the Canterbury Museum, Second Edition, (Christchurch, Lyttelton Times, 1900). Ling Roth, H, Great Benin: It’s Customs, Art and Horrors, (London, Routledge & Keegan Paul, 1903 Edition Reassure 1968), pp 1-17. Pitt-Rivers, Augustus, Antique Works of Art from Benin (London, Privately Printed, 1900) Plankensteiner, Barbara (ed), Benin Kings and Rituals: Court Acts from Nigeria, (Vienna: Kunsthistorisches Museum and Snoek Publishers, 2007). Ryder, A, Benin and the Europeans, 1485-1897, (London, Longman Green & Co 1969). Waite, Edgar Guide to the Collections in the Canterbury Museum, Third Edition, (Christchurch, T E Fraser Printer, 1906). Waterfield, H and King, J C H,Provenance: Twelve Collectors of Ethnographic Art in England, 1760-1990, (London, Paul Holberton Publishing, 2009), pp 55-64. 16 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

DESCRIPTION OF OBJECTS IN THE COLLECTION

FIG 1: BRASS BELL EA1976.772 Brass, 150 x 88 mm Tapered rectangular brass body with suspension handle in a plain loop form, with an iron clapper suspended inside. Bells were worn by priests and at sacrificial and other ritual ceremonies.46 Fyfe and Murray – Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 17

FIG 2: BRONZE WALL PLAQUE EA 1977.470 Bronze/brass, 460 x 330 x 123 mm Wall plaque with two almost identical full length court officials. The detailed rendering of the costume and regalia suggests the figures are directly associated with the royal court. The floral engravings on the main body of plaque are known as olokun designs and similar designs also appear on other objects and architecture associated with the royal court. 18 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

FIG 3: AMULET IN THE FORM OF AN ADZE EA 1977.204 Bronze/brass, 35 x 17 x 4 mm Small amulet or charm cast in the form of a miniature triangular adze. Suspension hole for possible wearing as a pendant or for attachment to court regalia. Fyfe and Murray – Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 19

FIG 4: AMULET WITH SURFACE DECORATION IN THE FORM OF AN ADZE EA1977.211 Bronze/brass, 31 x 16 x 2 mm Small amulet or charm shaped into the form of a miniature adze by cutting and filing from a piece of flat bronze, brass or copper recycled sheet rather than by casting. From the slightly erratic alignment of the two holes drilled through the body it is tempting to suggest that they were already part of the original ‘scrap metal’ from which the amulet was made. One face is decorated with a celestial star pattern of lines while the other has a carved geometric relief pattern. The holes could have been used for suspension as a pendant or for attachment to court regalia. 20 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

FIG 5: IVORY FIGURE FROM A SACRIFICIAL ALTAR EA1977.203 Ivory, 40 x 53 mm Carved ivory human figure possibly designed for use on a ritual altar or the apex of either a ceremonial hand-held ‘clapper’ or a chief’s staff. Well defined facial features, seated with hands resting on knees, legs not depicted. The peg like base is clearly a functional feature. Fyfe and Murray – Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 21

FIG 6: IVORY CARVED HEAD EA 1977.191 Ivory or bone, 67 x 25 mm Possibly a figure designed for use on a ritual altar, or the apex of either a ceremonial hand heldclapper or a chief’s staff. Appears to represent a chief wearing the headdress and collar of the traditional costume called pangolin skin imitating the scales of the pangolin, or scaly anteater, an animal which curls up when in danger and thus becomes invulnerable.49 The flat base has once had a peg like functional feature, as on EA 1977.203, but this has been cut off at some stage in order to allow the figure to stand upright on a flat surface. On stylistic grounds there is a possibility that this piece is Yoruba. 22 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

FIG 7: BRONZE FIGURE OF A WARRIOR EA 1977.192 Bronze/brass, 86 x 18 mm Figure of a warrior holding a dagger in hand. Well defined physical features and dress. It is possible that this figure was once mounted at the apex of a ritual dancing wand.40 It appears to be too small to have been used as a figure attached to an altar centre-piece.41 Fyfe and Murray – Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 23

FIG 8: HEAVY BRASS BRACELET EA1977.165 Brass, 19 x 11 mm; 75 mm external diameter/65 mm internal diameter Robust, heavy bracelet, cast with parallel inclined grooves giving the visual effect of a continuous spiral decoration.45

FIG 9: BONE ARMLET EA 1977.166 Bone or ivory, 13 x 6 mm; 100 mm external diameter/81 mm internal diameter Bone or possibly ivory armlet with carved geometric design, well worn through use.48

FIG 10: BRASS BRACELET EA1977.167 Brass, 12 x 5 mm; 77 mm external diameter/65mm internal diameter Plain brass bracelet, or possibly child’s armlet, with simple parallel grooves the only surface decoration. The current ‘twisted’ shape of the bracelet suggests that it may have been forcibly removed from the wearer.44 24 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

FIG 11: BIRD OF PROPHECY SCULPTURE FROM APEX OF CHIEF’S STAFF EA1976.775 Bronze/brass, 122 x 125 mm This fragment from a staff represents the ‘bird of prophecy’ with a kola nut in its beak. Although recorded as an emblem from a chief’s staff it was more likely to have once been part of a ritual item frequently referred to as a ‘clapper’.42 These staffs commemorate a legend relating toOba Esigie who reigned in the early sixteenth century. A bird of prophecy is said to have warned against going to war, the oba killed the bird and went on to victory and is said to have admonished his troops with the words, “Whoever wishes to succeed in life should not heed the bird that cries disaster”.43 Fyfe and Murray – Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 25

FIG 12: IVORY WAR HORN EA 1976.779 Ivory, 310 x35 mm Side-blown trumpet or horn blown on ceremonial and ritual occasions. Osun specialists use these horns to announce that a ceremony is about to begin. Decorated with four sets of rings that encircle the tusk and two snakes carved along the length of the body.47 26 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

FIG 13: COMMEMORATIVE HEAD EA 1977.468 Bronze/brass, 400 x 270 x 255 mm Ritual head representing an oba with vertical wings either side, for use on a royal altar.37 The base depicts examples of royal iconography including, leopard, cola nut, a severed cow’s head, mudfish and an elephant, represented by a trunk. It is likely to date from c1817-1933.38 Fyfe and Murray – Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 27

FIG 14: BRONZE KNIFE HANDLE EA 1976.771 Bronze/brass, 110 x 26 mm Handle from a sacrificial knife decorated with almost identical opposed faces (sometimes described as a janus configuration) with curled drooping moustaches. The figure is wearing a helmet and possibly represents a Portuguese/ European soldier. Used during rituals involving animal sacrifice associated with the royal altars.

FIG 15: IVORY STAFF / CLAPPER EA 1977.778 Ivory, iron, 260 x 35 x 16 mm Small, hand held ceremonial staff for use in rituals. Plain tapered ivory body, with carved human facial mask. Arms are represented by two moveable iron attachments secured with a bolt through the body. It is also possible that this object was used as a ‘clapper’ or rattle in religious ceremonies. 28 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

FIG 16: COMMEMORATIVE HEAD EA 1977.469 Bronze/brass, 370 x 270 x 2452 mm Ritual head representing an oba for use on a royal altar. This is very similar to a head in the British Museum.35 The base depicts examples of royal iconography including, leopard, cola nut, a severed cow’s head, mudfish and an elephant, represented by a trunk. It is likely to date from c1735-1816.36 Fyfe and Murray – Benin Art in Canterbury Museum 29

FIG 17: COMMEMORATIVE HEAD 2005.12.1 Bronze/brass, 348 x 155 x 128 mm Commemorative head for the altar of Queen Mother Iyobu of the Royal Court of Benin. Although attributed to the period 1900 to 1910, the head has stylistic similarities to an earlier head.39 However 2005.12.1 has been cast without a decorated base, which possibly reflects a functional shift following the loss of royal patronage.

Records of the Canterbury Museum, 2014 Vol. 28: 31-47 © Canterbury Museum 2014

Chasing the Sun: Coinage and Solar Worship in the Roman Empire of the Third and Early Fourth Centuries CE DANIELLE STEYN 22 Bronte Way, Rolleston 7614 [email protected]

ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION The third and early fourth centuries CE were a ‘Convinced, she now contracts her vast design, challenging period for the Romans, with almost And all her triumphs shrink into a coin… continuous warfare and over 50 emperors and The medal, faithful to its charge of fame, pretenders between 235 and 285. The frequent Through climes and ages bears each form and name: appearance of the god Sol (the Sun) on coin reverses In one short view subjected to our eye in this period is a marked departure from the standard Gods, emperors, heroes, sages, beauties, lie.’ range of religious motifs, which, it was once argued, – Alexander Pope1 attested a major shift away from the worship of Jupiter. This article catalogues and contextualises within current In the eighteenth century Alexander Pope perhaps historiographical debates a group of coins, bearing best summed up the potency and relevance of coinage, images of Sol and solar iconography, in the collection of particularly for studies of ancient civilisations. For the Canterbury Museum. Coinage was an important means Romans, coinage was charged with carrying the fame of the of communication during the late Roman Imperial emperors and their deeds, and stood the test of time more period, as evidenced by the increase in coin types and successfully than many temples, statues or reliefs. Pope also the speed with which coins were minted. The study of touched on another point that makes coinage invaluable; its Sol’s frequent appearance on coins, therefore, can tell ability to represent people and events on an incredibly small us much about the religious and political situation in scale – Rome and her glory contracted so that it could fit in the third and early fourth centuries CE, an important the palm of the hand and be carried over mountains and period for which there is limited literary evidence. across seas. With a glance and a flick of a coin, viewers saw gods, emperors, heroes, sages, beauties, small but clear, and KEYWORDS understood that these images were a reflection of the Empire Sol; Coins; Aurelian; Constantine; Rome. in which they lived. Whether these images were realistic reflections of the state of affairs in the Empire, or idealistic expectations of how life should or could be, they still tell us much about those who minted and used the coins. 32 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

The research undertaken in this study was inspired crown and raised right hand. The art of coins may be by an unpublished collection of Roman Imperial coins considered a language of images that, when read, give housed in Canterbury Museum, a significant number of insight into the messages and impressions that Roman which date to the third century CE and display images emperors wished to leave. of the Roman sun god, Sol, or solar iconography. Because the period of the third and early fourth THE SUN ON ROMAN COINS centuries was a particularly turbulent one in Roman Early (and influential) scholars posited that Rome had history, coins are essential evidence as they continued been home to two different sun gods in its history, Sol to be produced even when the construction of large- Indiges and Sol Invictus, with the former replaced by scale buildings and public works had ceased. The the latter in the third century CE. According to this images on coins, though miniature, are expressive and theory it was a matter of East versus West: the Syrian often of high quality, and for a number of third-century Sol Invictus superseding the Roman Sol Indiges.2 emperors coins furnish the only surviving portraits. This process was thought to be possible because the The discussion herein examines the importance of Republican Sol was a minor deity whose worship coins during the political upheaval of the third century was unworthy of the superior Romans, and because CE and puts a number of the coins from Canterbury mystery cults with Eastern antecedents did increase in Museum into context. This discussion also accounts for popularity in the Imperial period.3 Finally, when faced the exceptionally frequent appearance of Sol on Roman with the leadership crises and civil wars of the third coinage of the third century CE. In Roman antiquity Sol century, some Romans worshipped the old gods with was one of the few visible gods whose effects were felt more devotion, but many turned to the new gods whose by all of humanity; his chariot drew the sun up into the worship, scholars once thought, was spread through sky by day, and down again at night. Given the power the Empire with soldiers and others from the eastern of the sun to support or destroy life, it is not difficult to provinces.4 Gaston Halsberghe argued that when understand why ancient (agriculturally based) cultures the emperor Elagabalus introduced his black baetyl worshipped the sun in some form, or why Sol was often (conical sacred stone) from Emesa as the sacred image represented in art and literature. The reasons why Sol of his god, Elagabal, and Aurelian established his great was so popular on the coinage of Roman emperors, and temple to Sol Invictus in Rome, they were the same in context of political and military upheaval, are far less god: an eastern deity whose monotheistic-like worship obvious and require investigation. foreshadowed Rome’s acceptance of Christianity.5 Halsberghe further argued that the Sol evident in The coins in Canterbury Museum’s collection literature and visual representations from an earlier depicting Sol or solar iconography can tell us a period was replaced by this new solar deity, and used an number of things about the god, coinage in general, apparent decline in solar monuments – especially coins and the emperors under whom the coins were minted. – in the first two centuries CE as evidence to support During this investigation, 162 coins displaying Sol these claims.6 or solar iconography were examined in detail. In this study I have included only the most well-preserved More recently scholars have challenged Halsberghe’s and pertinent examples of this coinage. Some coins views and have argued that Sol never completely highlight the traditional iconography of Sol, which disappeared from monuments or coins. For example, remained virtually unchanged for three centuries. the imagery of Sol and Apollo had become so Others carry clear messages of authority and eternity interchangeable by the Augustan period (31 BCE linked with the emperor, whose portrait was invariably - 14 CE) that both gods could be understood as on the obverse (or in common parlance, the head) manifestations of the sun and referred to in the same of the coin. Information and ideas were conveyed monument. In this way Sol continued to be represented through the legends on both sides of the coins, through in a typically Graeco-Roman way on a variety of depictions of the emperor interacting with the god monuments throughout the Imperial period. It is thus directly, or through the emperor adopting attributes more likely that Sol continued as a common Roman and stances common to Sol, such as the radiate deity alongside the Emesene Elagabal, and that it was Steyn – Chasing the Sun: Coinage and Solar Worship in the Roman Empire of the Third and Early Fourth Centuries CE 33

Sol whom Aurelian chose as his patron, not the eastern certain that there was a temple in the Circus Maximus deity. In his 2008 thesis, Ragnar Hedlund argued that by the late first century BCE.13 Rome had at least four the popularity of images of Sol on coins in the third sanctuaries or temples for Sol, not including those for century CE was not due to his sudden introduction non-Roman solar deities, and at least two of these were to Rome from the East, but rather to his adoption by founded in the Republican period (c. 509 BCE - 31 several emperors as their protector and as a symbol BCE) or earlier.14 Devotion to the sun was evident in of hope and the eternity of the Empire.7 There is, in the Republican period but grew in importance in the fact, very little evidence for the idea of an eastern Sol Imperial period (31 BCE - c 337 CE) under various superseding a Roman Sol, and that which is available emperors who identified Sol as their patron and from coins, inscriptions, statuary and reliefs indicates protector.15 It is significant that the largest numbers of that Sol was continuously worshipped in Rome.8 To surviving images of Sol are on Roman coinage of all support this theory of one Roman Sol worshipped periods because coinage was one of the most accessible, throughout the Imperial period we can highlight the mobile and manageable visual media in the Roman recognisable nature of the god’s iconography, as it is world. Coins were easily transported and necessary for clear that Sol was represented visually as a Graeco- the transactions of daily life, and because they passed Roman god.9 As evidenced by the coins discussed below through the hands of almost every Roman, Sol’s images (for example, Figs 6, 7, 8, 9 and 12), Sol is always either depicted on coins were, potentially, as meaningful as nude or wearing a chiton (tunic) or chlamys (a cloak they were far-reaching. or cape). He often carries a globe or whip, he is usually radiate, and is most often shown in aquadriga (a four- Augustus, the first Roman emperor (r 31 BCE - 14 horsed chariot) or merely standing. There is nothing in CE), showed a keen interest in solar religion and set these attributes or poses to suggest specifically eastern up an obelisk from Egypt in the Circus Maximus.16 origins. Sol’s appearance is traditionally Graeco-Roman, Obelisks were great symbols of Egyptian sun worship, with little resemblance to other well-known deities from and were commonly found in areas dedicated to the eastern provinces, and from the earliest coins depicting sun. Moreover, given that one of the most common Sol to the latest, this iconography changes very little.10 ways of representing Sol was in his quadriga, as the triumphant charioteer, his presence in the Circus SOLAR WORSHIP IN EARLY-IMPERIAL ROME Maximus is unexceptional. The course of the chariots The sun and its movements were extremely important around the spina (the backbone, or central ridge) to the inhabitants of ancient Italy, who were mostly was compared with the course of the heavenly bodies farmers.11 Solar worship occurred there from an early around the sun, and an obelisk, as a symbol of a period and played a significant role in religious life, sunbeam, was the perfect centrepiece to this race.17 The but Sol was much more than an agricultural god. As inscription that Augustus added to the obelisk makes its the Romans came into contact with cultures that had solar function in Rome clear: sophisticated solar theology, they themselves began to view Sol as a metaphorical expression of power and ‘…Imperator Augustus, son of Divine Caesar…dedicated authority. The Republican temple of Sol in the Circus this obelisk to the sun, when Egypt had been brought under Maximus attests to the growing importance of the the sway of the Roman people.’18 god. This temple is thought to have been located in the stands of the Circus on the south side by the Aventine Obelisks, and by extension the sun, were thus an Hill, and to have been adorned with a prominent statue expression of a ruler’s power, but the cyclical nature of Sol on the roof. The cult of Sol was connected with of the sun also made it a potent symbol of the stability circuses from a very early date; indeed, legend has it and eternal nature of Rome and her rulers. From a that the first circus games were held by Circe in honour very early stage, the emperor Augustus associated of her father, Sol.12 The exact date when the temple himself with Apollo and portrayed himself as his was first built is unknown, but a connection between protégé.19 Dreams and omens reported in ancient the sun and circuses is visible on Etruscan mirrors sources associate the young Octavian with the sun and dated to the late fourth or third century BCE, and it is stars. According to tradition, on his entry into Rome 34 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

SOL IN THE THIRD AND EARLY FOURTH the people noticed a halo around the sun, heralding a CENTURIES CE new Golden Age presided over by Octavian, who had by then acquired the title Augustus (revered one).20 By The third century CE has traditionally been conquering Egypt, Octavian was able to appropriate characterised as a time of crisis, in which Rome was Sol and the power of the sun, which was important for threatened by invasions, famine, plague, economic emphasising his victory over Cleopatra and Antony. troubles, and at least fifty-four men claiming to be Apollo also appears on eight different coin types under emperor within 72 years.26 Almost all the emperors in Augustus, and this trend is continued by later emperors, the third century, from Caracalla to Diocletian, faced who chose to portray Apollo on their coinage in threats to their rule, both internally and externally, some way.21 But solar worship was clearly represented which stretched their resources and forced Rome in Roman religion from an early date, and the sun’s into a state of near-constant warfare. As the third connection with ideas of kingship and authority also century progressed, this situation intensified and the helps to explain why worship and recognition of Sol importance of Rome waned in comparison to that of increased in the Imperial period, when one man other provincial centres. Emperors spent the majority of claimed authority to rule over a vast Empire and its their reigns on campaign, with little time or money for people. constructing monuments and holding celebrations in Rome which, in previous centuries, was an established Coinage supplies clear evidence for an early established way of demonstrating power. Thus military necessity cult of the sun in Rome, and the Sol shown on these coins caused new cities to become centres of Imperial is iconographically identical to the Sol on coins from the activity.27 As Herodian explains, power was centred very third and early fourth centuries CE, such as those in the much in the person of the emperor, wherever he was, collection of Canterbury Museum. As a bust or driving a and this was usually in border regions from northern quadriga, Sol is continuously present on coins from 132 Italy to Sirmium, the Danube, Thrace, Byzantium, BCE to the beginning of the first century CE.22 Because Bithynia, and through Asia Minor to Antioch.28 With the sun was a powerful symbol of authority and kingship, so many claimants to the throne and usurpers, the need solar gods were often used to represent these ideas in art to legitimise his rule was vital for any new emperor if and monuments dedicated by emperors. For example, he wished to maintain power.29 This is evident from Augustus chose Apollo as his patron deity and dedicated the coinage, which indicates that even those emperors monuments to Apollo in his solar guise.23 Sol and Luna who were in power for a year or less, such as Gordian I (goddess of the moon) together signifiedaeternitas and Gordian II, Balbinus, Pupienus, and Aemilian, had (eternity), so that when they were depicted together they coins minted bearing their image and achievements of conveyed the idea of stability and longevity, which were their reign that they wished to emphasize.30 A sestertius important concepts for Augustus in establishing himself of Gordian I (Fig 1), whose coinage is rare in general, as sole ruler.24 Perhaps the other emperor most famous (or depicts the thin features of the emperor. The reverse infamous) for solar affinities before the third century was shows Fides (Loyalty) standing and holding a standard Nero, who ruled from 54-68 CE. On cameos and coins, and a sceptre, with the legend FIDES MILITVM SC and most notriously in a colossal statue at his lavish urban (loyalty of the soldiers). There is nothing unusual about villa, Nero was depicted wearing the radiate crown, which depicting the emperor or Fides in this way, and yet the (as will be discussed below) linked him both to Augustus fact that Gordian I and Gordian II only ruled for three and his patron, solar Apollo. Sol continued as a presence in weeks indicates how quickly coins were minted for art and on coinage throughout the second and early third emperors.31 centuries CE. While emperors of the second century did not associate themselves with Sol as closely as Augustus Because of the turbulent situation during the third and Nero had, the god’s presence was still visible in Rome century, it was necessary for emperors to portray their on coinage and in the colossus that continued to stand well right to rule as well as the qualities that made them into the third century, when Sol became associated with effective rulers wherever they could. In this way coins military victories, particularly in the East.25 became a key medium of communication throughout this century, through the inter-relationship of images Steyn – Chasing the Sun: Coinage and Solar Worship in the Roman Empire of the Third and Early Fourth Centuries CE 35

Fig 1: Sestertius of Gordian I/II (238 CE) Diameter: 30.8mm Obverse: IMP CAES M ANT GORDIANVS AFR, Laureate draped bust, facing right. Reverse: FIDES MILITVM SC, Fides standing facing left, holding standard in right hand and sceptre in left. Canterbury Museum 1994.223

Fig 2: Antoninianus of Gallienus (253-268 CE) Diameter: 22.9mm Obverse: GALLIENVS AVG, Radiate bust, facing left. Reverse: VICTORIA AVG, Victory facing left, holding palm branch and diadem. Canterbury Museum 1994.265

Fig 3: Antoninianus of Gallienus (253-268 CE) Diameter: 21.5mm Obverse: IMP GALLIENVS AVG, Radiate bust, facing right. Reverse: FORT REDVX, Fortuna seated facing left, holding palm branch and sceptre. Canterbury Museum 1994.274 36 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

Fig 4: Antoninianus of Postumus (259-268 CE) Diameter: 22.1mm Obverse: IMP POSTVMVS AVG, Radiate draped bust, facing right. Reverse: FIDES AEQUIT, Fides seated, facing left, holding standard and patera (?). Canterbury Museum 1994.303

Fig 5: Dupondius of Elagabalus (218-222 CE) Diameter: 26mm Obverse: IMP CAES M AVR ANTONINVS PIVS AVG, Radiate draped bust, facing right. Canterbury Museum 1994.191

Fig 6: Antoninianus of Aurelian (270-275 CE) Diameter: 23.5mm Obverse: IMP C AVRELIANVS AVG, Radiate cuirassed bust, facing right. Reverse: ORIENS AVG, Sol with globe in left hand, right hand outstretched, with captive at his feet. Canterbury Museum 1994.340 Steyn – Chasing the Sun: Coinage and Solar Worship in the Roman Empire of the Third and Early Fourth Centuries CE 37

on the obverse and reverse. The image on the obverse One of the ways in which emperors chose to was usually a portrait of the emperor, while the image communicate their authority and military skill was to on the reverse, according to Andrew Burnett, illustrated display martial images on coin reverses, represented (explicitly or implicitly) why the emperor was an object by deities and personifications that signified victory, of such focus.32 It is clear from the images and legends security, eternity and the invincibility of the emperor portrayed on coins that they were meant to be noticed, and Empire.38 An antoninianus of Gallienus (Fig 2) and emperors used this expectation to convey the shows the radiate emperor on the obverse, and Victory message of their own auctoritas and the divine support on the reverse, holding a palm branch and diadem. and protection that they enjoyed. Not a great deal is known about the organization of mints and who, in the By having Victory portrayed on the reverse of end, was responsible for the choice of images depicted his coins, the radiate Gallienus not only used solar on coins; however, it is clear that coins were under symbolism but also aligned himself with the goddess state control and as such should be considered official of victory in the eyes of the viewer. The same can be sources.33 said of the following antoniniani (Figs 3 and 4), which show Fortuna (Fortune) on the reverse of a coin of Coins comprise the largest body of surviving Gallienus, and Fides (Loyalty) on the reverse of a coin evidence for the soldier-emperors (emperors of the of Postumus. These coins served to link the image of the third century who came from military backgrounds) emperor with the virtues portrayed, inviting the viewer and the images on both sides were part of a language of to associate the obverse image of the emperor with the ideas, values and symbols available to these emperors reverse image of the virtue.39 for legitimising their rule.34 Coins were, effectively, a dialogue between the emperor and his people, expressing These personified virtues were intended to reassure the intentions and expectations of both parties.35 Coinage the people during this era of military and political did not constitute a monumental achievement in the turbulence, and also to maintain the loyalty of the same way that the erection of statues, arches and temples legions. Despite the fact that the army chose the did. In its ability to convey messages, however, coinage majority of emperors of the third century, coin imagery was more subtle and pervasive. Coins were, by the third suggests that divine approval was still important once century, a necessity of life used in everyday business a contender had been proclaimed emperor.40 This transactions and payment, and particularly for payment divine support was visually expressed in a number of the army. They were commonplace, and yet the images of ways: by depicting a god on coins, either alone or on coins changed as each new emperor minted new with the emperor, in the role of protector or patron; types to display his own portrait and titles. This was by portraying the emperor as a sacerdos (priest) of a particularly true in the third century, when emperors god; by showing the emperor in the guise of the god, ruled for such short periods of time and there was a dressed as or carrying attributes of a specific deity; decline in the construction of grand structures.36 It is or by associating the reigning emperor with past entirely plausible that this decline led to a greater reliance deified emperors through recognisable attributes and on the imagery of coinage to communicate and advertise deities.41 So, for example, in the chaos that followed the emperor’s achievements. In this respect, coins were Severus Alexander’s death (235 CE) and the struggles a different kind of monument, designed not so much to of the ensuing years, there was a marked decline in impress, but rather to circulate and infiltrate the Empire the construction, repair and votive dedications of the with reminders of the emperor and the qualities he traditional cults.42 Images and symbols of a religious possessed. Coins also acted as a memorial to emperors nature became more common on the coins after 235 and their reigns since they continued to circulate long CE, with specific deities, and a wider range of deities, after the emperor in question had died.37 Unless he appearing more frequently than in previous centuries.43 suffered a systematic condemnation of his memory The increase in religious coin types shows that for these through destruction of his portraits and name (damnatio warring emperors, always on the move, coins were a memoriae), the image and virtues of the emperor necessary and useful medium for communicating their remained visible throughout the Empire. religious policies and personal religious preferences. 38 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

In order to bolster support for their tenuous hold official deity of the Roman state, with his own priest on power, emperors of the third century relied on (a flamen) and an annual festival inserted into the traditional gods whose symbolism and iconography religious calendar. The great temple of Sol in Rome, were easily recognised and understood. Sol seems to famous for the richness of its offerings and dedications, have suited this purpose, along with Jupiter, Hercules was begun in 274 CE when Aurelian returned to the city and Mars, and was used accordingly. Given the need for to celebrate his triumph over Palmyra and Postumus’ the appearance of strength and stability during these Gallic Empire.50 His devotion to Sol was neither sudden years, and the negative response to the introduction of nor surprising, since his home province, Lower Moesia gods such as Elagabal, it is understandable that these on the Danube River, had long worshipped the sun.51 emperors chose to promote traditional Roman gods. Aurelian’s campaigns in the East, and his interaction Sol appears to have been a god who could cross cultural with eastern solar cults, further supported his desire to boundaries, and could visually connect the emperor reinvigorate sun worship in Rome, since he ascribed with the sun as a deity for both Romans and non- his victory over the Palmyrenes to the intervention Romans. For this reason Sol was a more effective means of Sol, and restored the temple of a local Syrian sun for emperors to express the idea of unity to an Empire god after his legionaries plundered and destroyed in turmoil. it.52 After Aurelian’s final suppression of Palmyra in 272 CE there was a notable shift in emphasis in mints The first third-century emperor to show marked around the Empire, and Sol began to supplant Jupiter devotion to a solar god was Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, as the emperor’s divine sponsor.53 While Aurelian did also known as Elagabalus (r 218 - 222 CE) (see Fig 5).44 not attempt to destroy the worship of other gods, or promote Sol as a supreme god, it is clear that Sol was his According to Cassius Dio, Elagabalus’ reign was one special protector and patron, and his monuments and of debauchery and stereotypically eastern excess, coinage attest to this. For example, a coin from the reign characterised by his devotion to the god Elagabal, of Aurelian bears the image of the radiate emperor on and the power of his mother and grandmother, who the obverse, and Sol standing holding a globe, with a effectively ruled through him.45 Sacrifices took place captive at his feet on the reverse, and the reverse legend at sunrise, which was appropriate for a solar deity who ORIENS AVG (dawn or rising of Aurelian) (Fig 6).54 made his first appearance at dawn.46 According to Herodian, Elagabalus built a great temple to Elagabal on This coin may be interpreted as Aurelian reasserting the Palatine and put statues of other Roman gods into his power in the eastern Empire through his military it in order to subjugate the traditional Roman deities to victories, and doing so with the support of his divine Elagabal.47 The ancient historians convey a one-sided patron Sol (compare also with Fig 8). In this example, and largely negative view of Elagabal and the way in the term ‘Oriens’ may be a deliberate pun refering to which he was perceived by Romans. When Elagabalus the dawn of Aurelian and his rule and the setting of the was assassinated and suffereddamnatio memoriae, so ‘east’ in defeat. did his god. His successor, Severus Alexander, returned Jupiter Optimus Maximus to his place as supreme god After Aurelian’s death in 275, Sol’s presence on in the Roman pantheon. It is clear that Elagabal and coinage waned under the Tetrarchs, apart from a brief Sol Invictus were different gods, the former of eastern resurgence under Probus (r 276-282 CE), who minted origins, and the latter worshipped in Rome from the a large number of Sol coin types.55 However, the legacy early Republic.48 of this solar worship may be seen in the reign of Constantine, who continued this devotion to Sol when It was this older Sol that reappears in the ancient he became emperor in 312 CE, a fact that is evident literary sources that describe the life of the emperor from the coinage of his reign.56 Whether because of Aurelian (r 270-275 CE), who encouraged the worship religious devotion, or simply because he wanted to of Sol Invictus and promoted the idea that he himself differentiate himself from the Tetrarchs, the coinage of was vice-regent of the sun god, his representative on Constantine displayed many Sol types during his early earth.49 At this time Sol Invictus was recognised as an years, and the god remained popular on coins even Steyn – Chasing the Sun: Coinage and Solar Worship in the Roman Empire of the Third and Early Fourth Centuries CE 39

Fig 7: Aes of Constantine I (307-337 CE) Diameter: 20.6mm Obverse: IMP CONSTANTINVS AVG, Laureate cuirassed bust, facing right. Reverse: SOLI INVICTO COMITI, Sol facing left, right arm outstretched, globe in left hand. Canterbury Museum 1994.465

Fig 8: Antoninianus of Aurelian (270-275 CE) Diameter: 21.7mm Obverse: IMP AVRELIANVS AVG, Radiate cuirassed bust, facing right. Reverse: ORIENS AVG, Sol with globe in left hand, right hand outstretched, placing foot on one of two captives at feet. Canterbury Museum 1994.341

Fig 9: Sestertius of Severus Alexander (222-235 CE) Diameter: 29.6mm Obverse: IMP ALEXANDER PIVS AVG, Laureate bust, facing right. Reverse: PM TRP XIII COS III PP SC, Sol advancing, holding whip in left hand, right hand outstretched. Canterbury Museum 1994.205 40 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

Fig 10: Antoninianus of Probus (276-282 CE) Diameter: 22.6mm Obverse: IMP C M AVR PROBVS AVG, Radiate bust, facing right. Reverse: CLEMENTIA TEMP, Probus standing right, receiving globe from Jupiter holding thunderbolt. Canterbury Museum 1994.355

Fig 11: As of Maximianus (286-310 CE) Diameter: 23.9mm Obverse: IMP MAXIMIANVS PF AVG, Radiate draped bust, facing right. Reverse: IOVI CONSERVAT AVG, Jupiter standing facing left, holding thunderbolt in right hand, and sceptre in left. Canterbury Museum 1994.390

Fig 12: As of Licinius (308-324 CE) Diameter: 20.9mm Obverse: IMP LICINIVS PF AVG, Laureate cuirassed bust, facing right. Reverse: SOLI INVICTO COMITI, Sol standing facing left with chlamys, holding globe in left hand, right hand outstretched Canterbury Museum 1994.429 Steyn – Chasing the Sun: Coinage and Solar Worship in the Roman Empire of the Third and Early Fourth Centuries CE 41

after Christianity was adopted as the official religion of stability. The bust image type has the fewest attributes the Empire.57 The importance of solar theology during because the primary focus was on the head of the the reign of Constantine has been determined by deity; however, this focus of attention means that examining the physical remains, especially coins, which the attributes that are depicted are some of the most frequently bore images or inscriptions mentioning the important and recognisable of the god’s symbols. Sol sun god (for example, Fig 7). as a bust is always depicted radiate. The rays shown emanating from Sol’s head are clearly a reference to Not since Aurelian had there been a comparably his solar nature, symbolizing both natural and divine extensive use of Sol. In Rome, Constantine’s triumphal light, as he is both a personification of the sun and a arch clearly referred to the emperor’s relationship deity. Often the busts of Sol appear with some sort of with Sol, with a radiate bust of the god in the east bay, cloak, and he is always depicted as young and beardless, and a small statue of Sol in the historical frieze on the with thick, loose locks.62 Thequadriga image type west side of the arch.58 Sol and Luna are represented usually allows for a representation of Sol in full, with in two roundels on the east and west sides of the arch, the radiate crown and cloak, either hanging down his with Sol rising from the ocean in his quadriga and back or flying out behind him, and often carrying a Luna descending in her biga.59 Nor was solar imagery whip in his left hand with his right hand outstretched. restricted to Rome. In Constantinople, a radiate statue In myth Sol is mentioned together with his chariot of the emperor was placed on top of a column in the and ‘eager tramping steeds’, and these coins are visual new forum to mark the dedication of Constantine’s representations of his role as cosmic charioteer, riding new capital, suggesting perhaps, that Constantine across the sky scattering darkness and bringing light.63 was a radiant ruler with a solar deity as protector.60 The whip used to spur the horses is another attribute After Constantine, Sol’s depiction on coinage declined of this role of charioteer. All three representational significantly, though he would make a brief resurgence types for Sol appear on third century coins; however, under the emperor Julian.61 The longevity of solar the standing/striding Sol is the most common and is worship in Rome and the consistency with which the only type represented by the coins in Canterbury Sol was chosen as patron deity indicates the close Museum.64 While in the standing/striding pose, Sol was association he had with Imperial power. often depicted holding a globe, usually in his left hand and with his right hand raised (Fig 8), but sometimes THE ICONOGRAPHY ON COINAGE he was shown holding a whip, as in a well-preserved To understand why Sol appears so frequently on sestertius of Severus Alexander (r 222-235 CE) (Fig 9). coins of the third and early fourth centuries CE, it is necessary to explore his iconography and its possible The globe was an important and recognisable meanings. The iconography used to represent Sol symbol in ancient art, and it was originally used by the visually was established by the first century BCE Greeks as a teaching device for lessons in astronomy and was comprehensible and easily recognisable, and astrology.65 For the Romans, it was a symbol of the distinguishing Sol from other solar deities while power of the emperors, bestowed by the gods.66 Scenes communicating his nature and domain. The most on coins that depicted Jupiter or Sol handing a globe common attributes of Sol were his crown, quadriga, to the emperor are understood as the god giving power whip, globe, and cloak. A number of gestures or actions to the emperor. This can be seen on an antoninianus also appeared, such as raising the right hand, trampling of Probus (Fig 10) that shows Jupiter holding his enemies, and handing a globe to the emperor. Scholars thunderbolt and handing a globe to the emperor. have divided depictions of Sol into three general categories: Sol shown as a bust, Sol in a quadriga, Sol’s increased importance is evident when we and Sol standing or striding. These three categories consider that often in the third century, it was Sol who all display similar elements of solar iconography, but handed the globe to the emperor, a role which had, up the differences between them are telling and serve to to this time, been reserved for Jupiter. In this way Sol highlight the god’s various attributes and spheres of was seen as entrusting his cosmic power to the emperor, influence, which are the sun, eternity, invincibility, and making him ruler of the cosmos.67 Even his stance when 42 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

at an early stage and the frequency of his presence on coins in the third century, it appears that emperors in this period used his image and his attributes in much the same way that they did those of Jupiter, Mars, and Hercules. A solar symbol often worn by emperors was the radiate crown, although the emperors’ radiate crown revealed slight differences to the crown worn by Sol. Sol was never depicted with a nimbus without rays, or with a radiate crown with lemnisci (ribbons), while the emperor’s crown was always depicted with ribbons that secured the fillet around the head. The Fig 13: Antoninianus of Probus (276-282 CE) Diameter: 22.8mm ribbons show that the crown worn by the emperor was Obverse: IMP C PROBVS P F AVG, Radiate cuirassed bust, facing a real object, whereas Sol’s crown was an indicator of right. divine light.68 Two antoniniani of Probus (Figs 13 and Canterbury Museum 1994.361 14) show the Imperial crown attached by lemnisci, with the first antoninianus showing on the obverse a bust of the emperor, cuirassed and wearing the radiate crown (Fig 13). In this image Probus is clearly portrayed as the ‘soldier-emperor’ serving alongside his troops.

This second antoninianus shows the cuirassed emperor wearing a helmet and radiate crown, and carrying a spear and shield (Fig 14). The legend reads VIRTVS PROBI AVG (the excellence of Probus Augustus) which, when taken together with the image, portrays Probus as the concerned emperor, fighting alongside his men and possessing the virtus of a good Fig 14: Antoninianus of Probus (276-282 CE) Diameter: 24mm ruler. Obverse: VIRTVS PROBI AVG, Radiate helmeted, cuirassed bust, with spear and shield, facing left. Sol and the radiate crown thus became available Canterbury Museum 1994.359 to emperors as part of a language of images with the capacity to convey messages of authority, power, divine support and links to Augustus and the Pax Romana (Roman peace). As a personification of the sun and a standing and holding a globe or whip recalls Jupiter symbol of eternity, Sol was useful to emperors of the standing holding a spear and thunderbolt (Fig 11, cf third century CE because their tenuous hold on power Fig 12). required support from a deity, especially one favoured by previous good emperors. The association between Sol was also depicted trampling captives, which emperor and god was spread effectively on coinage, gave the scene a martial quality and suggested that Sol, where both the emperor and deity were depicted on the and by extension the emperor, was or would be the same medium. triumphant victor (see Fig 8). The coins of the third century were not merely The emperors of the third and early fourth currency, but were also ‘monuments’ of an Imperial centuries who favoured Sol did so because he authority that was under threat due to the pressures represented something that they believed was powerful, facing the Roman Empire at this time. The emperors universal, eternal or, at the very least, useful to their of the third century had little time while on campaign visual programme. Given Sol’s appearance on coins to dedicate temples and hold triumphs, and coins, Steyn – Chasing the Sun: Coinage and Solar Worship in the Roman Empire of the Third and Early Fourth Centuries CE 43

though less spectacular, were a practical way for them I-VII, Apollo types appear on coins of Domitian, Trajan, to celebrate the achievements of their reigns. The solar Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, Commodus, Pescennius Niger, iconography of Roman coinage is a subject that can Septimius Severus, Caracalla, Maximinus, Gordian III, shed much light on the religious and political situation Philip I, Trajan Decius, Hostilian, Trebonianus Gallus, in the Roman Empire during this time. This study Volusian, Aemilian, Valerian, Gallienus, Claudius II, places the third-fourth century coins with solar imagery Quintillus, Aurelian, Postumus. in Canterbury Museum’s collection into their historical 22 Coins L1-1-14, Hijmans 2009, 411-415. context. The images of Sol on these coins emphasised 23 Zanker 1988, 49, 50. the god’s role as cosmic charioteer and invincible 24 Hijmans 2009, 563. bringer of light, eternal and predictable, and cast him as 25 A coin type of Trajan, minted between 114-117 a powerful and comforting symbol during a time when CE, with a bust of Sol on the reverse, commemorates so much was uncertain and the face of the Empire was his Parthian campaign with the legend, PARTHICO changing forever. PMTRPCOSVIPPSPQR (RIC Vol II, Trajan 326-329). Cf Rowan 2009, 306. END NOTES: 26 Figure taken from Maximinus I (235-238 CE) until 1Alexander Pope, Epistle V: To Mr. Addison - Occasioned Constantine I (307-337 CE). by his Dialogues on Medals. In Alexander Pope edited 27 Millar 2001, 43-44. by Pat Rogers, 174-176, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 28 Herodian I.6.5: ‘Furthermore, Rome is where the 2013. emperor is.’; Millar 2001, 44. 2 Wissowa 1912, 365; Halsberghe 1972, 35 and 54. 29 Manders 2012, 25 and 28. 3 Hijmans 2009, 7; Beard, North and Price 2000, 246-247. 30 See Duncan-Jones 2005, 461, on the importance of the 4 Leppin 2007, 96. Imperial image and the speed with which images of new 5 Halsberghe 1972, 130; Turcan 2000 a, 176-177. emperors were spread throughout the Empire. 6 Halsberghe 1972, 37. 31 Carson 1990, 77. 7 Hedlund 2008, 190-191. 32 Burnett 1987, 69. 8 Hijmans 2009, 24. 33 Noreňa 2011 a, 249; Cheung 1998, 53. 9 Hijmans 2009, 93; Hedlund 2008, 191. 34 Hedlund 2008, 231; Hannestad 1988, 11; Zanker 1988, 3. 10 Hijmans 2009, 72. 35 Hannestad 1988, 12. 11 Halsberghe 1972, 33; see also Von Domaszewski 1909, 36 A number of bath complexes were built by various 173; and Altheim 1941, 24-25. emperors, and Aurelian built walls around Rome; however, 12 Tertullian De Spectaculis 8; Bell 2007, 167. in comparison to previous centuries, construction of 13 Humphrey 1986, 91; Bell 2007, 167; Richardson 1992, monuments in Rome declined in this period. 365. 37 Cheung 1998, 56-57. 14 Hijmans 2009, 483. The two temples believed to have 38 Hedlund 2008, 91. been established in the Republic are a Pulvinar Sol 39 Noreňa 2001, 152-153. mentioned by Quintilian (1.7.12), and the temple in the 40 Hedlund 2008, 234. Circus Maximus; Richardson 1992, 322 and 365. 41 Manders 2012, 41ff; De Blois 2006, 274-275; Fears 1977, 15 Fears 1987, 408. 259-260. 16 Humphrey 1986, 94. 42 Fowden 2005, 556; De Blois 2002, 215. 17 Roullet 1972, 43; Futrell 2006, 76-77. 43 Manders 2012, 95. 18 ‘IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVGVSTVS PONTIFEX 44 Southern 2001, 58. MAXIMVS IMP XII COS XI TRIB POT XIV AEGVPTO 45 Dio’s Roman History 80.11.1-2; Herodian II.5.4-9. IN POTESTATEM POPVLI ROMANI REDACTA SOLI 46 Dio’s Roman History 79.31.1; Scriptores Historia Augustae DONVM DEDIT’ (CIL 6.701 Reprinted in ILS 91) In Vita Antoninus Heliogabalus 1-2.4; Herodian II.5.8-9. See Iversen 1968, 65; Quinn Schofield 1969, 648. also Beard, North and Price 2000, 256. 19 Zanker 1988, 44. 47 II.5.8-9; Scriptores Historia Augustae Vita Antoninus 20 Suetonius Augustus II 94-95; Zanker 1988, 47-48. Heliogabalus. 2.4-5.2. 21 According to an analysis of coin types in the RIC, Vol 48 Hijmans 2009, 1. 44 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

49 Watson 1999, 188. (1976) Translated by Birley A. Penguin Books, 50 Zosimus’ Historia Nova I.61; Grant 1985, 184, 187; London. Turcan 2000 b, 45. Suetonius (1982) The Twelve Caesars.Translated by 51 Scriptores Historia Augustae Aurelian 4.2, 5.5; Sextus Graves R. Penguin Books, New York. Pompeius Festus De verborum significatu quae supersunt Tertullian (1931) De Spectaculis. Translated by Glover T 18; Turcan 2000 b, 45; White 2005, 132. R. The Loeb Classical Library, London. 52 Halsberghe 1972, 132-133; Scriptores Historia Augustae Tibullus (1988) Translated by Postgate J P. The Loeb Aurelian 25.4, 31.7-9; Watson 1999, 188. Classical Library, London. 53 Watson 1999, 189. Zosimus (1967) Historia Nova. Translated by Buchanan 54 ORIENS could also refer to the East, in which case the J J and Davis H T. Trinity University Press, San coin could be alluding to Aurelian’s victory over Palmyra. Antonio. 55 Halsberghe 1972, 164. 56 Also see Jones 2000, 69. SECONDARY SOURCES: 57 Van Dam 2008, 178. Altheim F (1941) Italien und Rom. Pantheon, 58 Bardill 2012, 98; the historical frieze features soldiers in Amsterdam. procession carrying poles topped by small statues of the Bardill J (2012) Constantine, Divine Emperor of the gods, including Sol. Christian Golden Age. Cambridge University Press, 59 Bardill 2012, 99. Cambridge. 60 Bardill 2012, 28 and 88. Beard M, North J, Price S (2000) Religions of Rome. 61 Zosimus’ Historia Nova III.9 Volume I. A History. Cambridge University Press, 62 Hijmans 2009, 73; Stewart 1993, 42-43. Cambridge. 63 For example, Catullus 63.39; Tibullus 2.5.60; Propertius Beard M, North J, Price S (1999) Religions of Rome. Elegies 2.15.32; Lucretius De Rerum Natura 5.383ff. Volume II. A Sourcebook. Cambridge University 64 For good examples of Sol as a bust see: http://wildwinds. Press, Cambridge. com/coins/ric/postumus/RIC_0317.jpg, or http:// Bell R (2007) Power and Piety: Augustan Imagery and wildwinds.com/coins/sear5/s6214.html#RIC_0282,Aureus. the Cult of the Magna Mater. A thesis submitted in For examples of Sol in a quadriga see: http://wildwinds. partial fulfilment of requirements for the degree of com/coins/ric/caracalla/RIC_0294ADD.jpg, or http:// Doctor of Philosophy. University of Canterbury, wildwinds.com/coins/ric/probus/RIC_0776.jpg. Christchurch. 65 Hijmans 2009, 75. Boatwright M T, Gargola N, Lenski D J, Talbert R J A 66 Molnar 1998, 2; Hijmans 2009, 75. (2012)The Romans. From Village to Empire.Oxford 67 Watson 1999, 190. University Press, Oxford. 68 Hijmans 2009, 509; Bardill 2012, 30. Burnett A (1987) Coinage in the Roman World. B A Seaby Ltd, London. REFERENCES Carson R A G (1980) Principal Coins of the Romans. Volume II, The Principate 31 BC-AD296. British PRIMARY SOURCES: Museum Publications Ltd, London. Cassius Dio (1969) Dio’s Roman History. Translated by Carson R A G (1990) Coins of the Roman Empire. Cary E The Loeb Classical Library, London. Routledge, London. Catullus (1988) Translated by Cornish F W. The Loeb Cheung A (1998) The Political Significance of Roman Classical Library, London. Imperial Coin Types, Schweizer Münzblätter, Volume Herodian (1970) Translated by Whittaker C R. The 189 pp 53-61. Loeb Classical Library, London. De Blois L (2002) The Crisis of the Third Century AD Lucretius (1975) De Rerum Natura. Translated by Rouse in the Roman Empire: A Modern Myth? In De Blois W H D. The Loeb Classical Library, London. L and Rich J (eds) The Transformation of Economic Propertius (1990) Elegies. Translated by Goold G P. The Life Under the Roman Empire. Gieben, Amsterdam. Loeb Classical Library, London. De Blois (2006) Emperorship in a Period of Crises. In Scriptores Historiae Augustae; Lives of the Later Caesars De Blois L, Funke P and Hahn J (eds) The Impact of Steyn – Chasing the Sun: Coinage and Solar Worship in the Roman Empire of the Third and Early Fourth Centuries CE 45

Imperial Rome on Religions, Ritual and Religious Life of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol 59, No in the Roman Empire. Brill, Leiden. 1 pp 50-77. Duncan-Jones R P (2005) Implications of Roman Leppin H (2007) Old Religions Transformed: Religions Coinage: debates and differences.Klio 87 pp 456- and Religious Policy from Decius to Constantine. 487. In Rüpke J (ed) A Companion to Roman Religion. Fears J R (1976) The Solar Monarchy of Nero and the Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. Imperial Panegyric of Q Curtius Rufus. Historia: Manders E (2012) Coining Images of Power; Patterns in Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd 25, H.4 (4th Qtr), the Representation of Roman Emperors on Imperial pp 494-496. Coinage, AD 193-284. Brill, Leiden and Boston. Fears J R (1977) Princeps a diis electus: the Divine Mattingley H, Sydenham E A, Sutherland C H V (1962) Election of the Emperor as a Political Concept at The Roman Imperial Coinage. Volumes I-V.Spink Rome. American Academy at Rome, Rome. and Son Ltd., London. Fears J R (1987) Sol Invictus. In Eliade M and Adams Metcalf W E (2006) Roman Imperial Numismatics. In C J (eds) The Encyclopedia of Religion, Volume 13. Potter D S (ed) A Companion to the Roman Empire. Macmillan, New York. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. Fowden G (2005) Late Polytheism. In Bowman A K, Millar F (2001) The Emperor in the Roman World. Garnsey P, Cameron A (eds) The Cambridge Ancient Duckworth, London. History. 2nd Edition. Volume XII. The Crisis of Molnar M R (June 1998) Symbolism of the Sphere. The Empire, AD 193-337. Cambridge University Press, Celator. pp 1-2. Cambridge. Noreňa C F (2001) The Communication of the Futrell A (2006) The Roman Games.Blackwell Emperor’s Virtues. The Journal of Roman Studies, Publishing, Oxford. Vol 91 pp 146-168. Grant M (1985) The Roman Emperors. A Biographical Noreňa C F (2011 a) Coins and Communication. In guide to the rulers of Imperial Rome, 31BC-AD476. Peachin M (ed). The Oxford Handbook of Social Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York. Relations in the Roman World. Oxford; Oxford Halsberghe G H (1972) The Cult of Sol Invictus. E J Brill, University Press. Leiden. Pope A (1993) Epistle V: To Mr. Addison - Occasioned Hannestad N (1988) Roman Art and Imperial Policy. by his Dialogues on Medals. In Rogers P (ed.) Aarhus University Press, Aarhus. Alexander Pope. Oxford University Press; Oxford. Hedlund R (2008) “…achieved nothing worthy of Quinn Schofield W (1969) Sol in the Circus Maximus. memory.” Coinage and Authority in the Roman In Bibauw J (ed) Hommages à Marcel Renard. Empire c AD 260-295. University of Uppsala, Latomus Revue D’études Latines, Bruxelles. Uppsala. Richardson L (1992) A New Topographical Dictionary Hijmans S (2003) Metaphor, Symbol and Reality: of Rome. The John Hopkins University Press, The Polysemy of the Imperial Radiate Crown. In Baltimore and London. Mattusch C C (ed) Common Ground. Archaeology, Roullet A (1972) The Egyptian and Egyptianising Art, Science, and Humanities. Monuments of Imperial Rome. E J Brill, Leiden. Hijmans S (2009) Sol. The sun in the Art and Religions of Rowan C (2009) Under Divine Auspices: Patron Rome. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Netherlands. Deities and the Visualisation of Imperial Power in Hölscher T (2004) The Language of Images in Roman the Severan Period (PhD Thesis). Department of Art. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Ancient History, Macquarie University. Humphrey J H (1986) Roman Circuses; Arenas for Southern P (2001) The Roman Empire from Severus to Chariot Racing. B T Batsford Ltd, London. Constantine. Routledge, London. Iversen E (1968) Obelisks in Exile. Volume 1: Stewart A (1993) Faces of Power; Alexander’s Image and The Obelisks of Rome.G E C Gad Publishers, Hellenistic Politics. University of California Press, Copenhagen. Berkeley. Jones M W (Mar 2000) Genesis and Mimesis: The Sutherland C H V, Carson R A G, Bruun P M (1966) Design of the Arch of Constantine in Rome. Journal The Roman Imperial Coinage. Volumes VI-VIII. 46 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

Constantine and Licinius, AD 313-337. Spink and Son Ltd., London. Turcan R (2000 a) The Cults of the Roman Empire. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford. Tucan R (2000 b) The Gods of Ancient Rome.Routledge, New York. Van Dam R (2008) The Roman Revolution of Constantine. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Von Domaszewski A (1909) Abhandlungen Zur Römischen Religion. Druck und Verlag von BG Teubner, Leipzig and Berlin. Watson A (1999) Aurelian and the Third Century. Routledge, London and New York. White J F (2005) Restorer of the World; The Roman Emperor Aurelian. Spellmount, Staplehurst.

Records of the Canterbury Museum, 2014, Vol. 28: 49-59 © Canterbury Museum 2014

Funerary Portrait Of A Palmyrene Priest DR LUCY WADESON Centre de Recherches en Archéologie et Patrimoine, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue F.D. Roosevelt 50 1050 Bruxelles, Belgium. [email protected]

ABSTRACT it according to stylistic analysis. This information will This article presents the results of an examination of a contribute to scholarship on Palmyrene sculpture and sculpted portrait head from Palmyra (Syria) that was portraiture, and the head will be a new addition to the donated to Canterbury Museum in 1980. On the basis approximately 2,000 Palmyrene sculpted portraits held of a detailed study of the sculpture, it is proposed that in museums all over the world.2 it represents a priest and was originally attached to a funerary statue of a figure reclining either in a banquet According to the soldier’s notes on the purchase of relief or on the lid of a sarcophagus placed in one of this artefact, he was given the choice of two sculpted Palmyra’s many tombs. A third century CE date is heads by an employee of the Hotel Zenobia.3 He was suggested on the basis of facial features and attributes told that one represented the renowned Zenobia, Queen that accord with other portraits dated by inscriptions. of Palmyra in the third century CE, while the other Furthermore, this period was popular for the production represented her husband, King Odenathus. The soldier of funerary banquet reliefs with figures carved fully in chose the supposed head of Odenathus, as the female the round. head was damaged. Yet, the portrait bears no inscription or characterising features that could demonstrate that KEY WORDS it represents Odenathus. Furthermore, no certain large- Palmyra; portraiture; funerary sculpture; tombs; priests. scale images of Odenathus have yet been discovered and therefore knowledge of his appearance is limited.4 Such INTRODUCTION fictitious claims are commonly made by antiquities While on active service in Syria during World War dealers as a selling tactic and as a way to increase the Two, a New Zealand soldier purchased a sculpted value of an artefact. The eagerness of archaeologists and marble head from the Hotel Zenobia in the ancient scholars to find representations of royal personages also site of Palmyra (now Tadmor) in Syria. He brought plays a part in propagating false identifications, as an this artefact back home to New Zealand and in 1980 incident in the nineteenth century exploits of William donated it to Canterbury Museum in Christchurch. Wright reveals. During his exploration of the ruins of This article presents the key results of a study of this Palmyra (before any formal excavations had begun), sculpture.1 It describes and identifies the head, discusses Wright was intent on finding the statue of Zenobia its proposed original placement and function, and dates that once stood on the bracket of a column in the 50 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

central colonnaded street, according to the surviving Several of the tombs are decorated with fresco paintings inscription. He encouraged the local workers to find the and stucco, such as the Hypogeum of the Three statue in the surrounding rubble by offering a reward. Brothers (140 CE).10 However, most ubiquitous is the Since the workers were keen for the reward, they almost sculpture that adorns the tombs, mainly in the form of immediately found two sculpted female heads.5 This funerary portraits of the deceased. While portraits of story explains the eagerness with which portraits found Palmyrenes are also known in non-funerary contexts, out of context are identified as representing one or the such as in reliefs in sanctuaries or the honorific statues other of the famed royal couple. set up in the city centre, the largest corpus comes from the tombs.11 The funerary portraits were an effective PALMYRA AND ITS PORTRAITURE means by which individuals and families could display Palmyra is located in an oasis in the Syrian Desert, their social and cultural identities, and they provide approximately mid-way between the Mediterranean scholars with a wealth of information on the lives of and the Euphrates (Pl 1), and flourished during the first the Palmyrenes, their artistic developments, and their three centuries CE until its destruction by Aurelian in funerary practices and beliefs. 272 CE. Palmyra’s inclusion in the eastern part of the Roman Empire during these centuries transformed Most common are the portrait busts carved in relief the appearance of the city, which acquired a new on rectangular limestone slabs that sealed the loculus monumental aspect and all the typical amenities of where the individual was buried (Pls 4 and 5). These Greco-Roman cities of the eastern Mediterranean portraits of men, women and children are fairly generic (Pl 2).6 This transformation was also a result of the and are not realistic depictions of the individuals.12 wealth and prosperity of the Palmyrenes, who gained Rather, the identity of the deceased was conveyed economically through involvement in the trade of through the inscriptions accompanying the portraits, luxury goods between the Parthian and Roman and their attributes, clothing and gestures.13 Women empires, and the natural resources of the city such are often heavily adorned with jewellery and veils and as the Efqa spring, fertile soil and nearby sources of are sometimes accompanied by their children, showing limestone and marble. their roles as mothers, or by domestic items that recall their household duties.14 Priests can be identified by Besides financing building projects in the their clothing, which conformed to a specific dress code, urban centre, the affluent inhabitants of Palmyra and also by the cultic objects and religious equipment expressed their wealth and social standing by building they hold.15 The iconography reveals important monumental family tombs outside the city. Among information about the individual’s role in the civic the more than 150 tombs, three types exist.7 The most and religious life of Palmyra. These memorials to the monumental of these are the multi-storied tower tombs deceased, which also symbolised the essence or soul of that are prominent in the landscape and are the earliest the individual (nefesh16), sealed rows and rows of loculi type of monumental tomb to appear in Palmyra (Pl 3). in the walls and gave the tomb chamber the appearance The earliest, the Tomb of ‘Atenatan, was built in 9 BCE.8 of a portrait gallery.17 From around the end of the 1st century CE, hypogea (subterranean chambers) began to be constructed, Funerary sculpture is also found in banquet reliefs solving the problem of space limitations. Finally, tombs or on the lids of sarcophagi, where the tomb founder or imitating temples (temple tombs or funerary temples) head of the family is seen reclining and accompanied became popular from around the mid-2nd century CE by his (smaller) family members (Pl 6a-b).18 The base onwards, the best known being Tomb 86 at the end of of the relief or the sarcophagus itself is often modelled the Colonnaded Street (Pl 2). Burial took place mainly to represent a banqueting couch (kline) and sometimes in loculi (funerary compartments) in the walls, but also contains further reliefs.19 These sculptural groups often sometimes in sarcophagi (stone coffins). The dead were take the most prominent position in the tomb chamber wrapped in cloth that had been soaked with resin.9 and are aligned with the entranceway. Sarcophagi are often arranged in triclinium (three couches) form to recreate the banquet scene.20 Banquet reliefs are also Wadeson – Funerary Portrait Of A Palmyrene Priest 51

found in prominent positions on the facades of tower indication of tear ducts. The nose is aquiline and the tombs, such as on the Tomb of Kithôt dated to 40 CE lips are small and thin, with a slightly bigger lower lip. (Pl 7).21 The neck has a curved line suggesting a fold of flesh. Although the modius covers most of the forehead, Notably, the reclining banqueters wear Parthian there is no indication of hair anywhere on the head. costume, including embroidered long-sleeved tunic, The ears are small and crudely carved. The left ear has trousers and cloak (Pl 8), while the men in the relief the suggestion of an inner section and seems to be busts are dressed in Greco-Roman attire including tunic more finished than the right ear, which still has stone and himation (outer garment/cloak).22 This distinction attached to the back of it (Pls 12 and 13). In fact, the has recently been explored by Maura Heyn, who right side of the head is less finished than the left. The stresses the various identities these individuals wished blank band of the wreath continues further around the to portray, and in particular their role in religious left side than the right, and the stone on the right side and civic duties.23 These differences also remind us has an unfinished quality. There is a slight asymmetry of the various cultural traditions that influenced the in the face, indicating a slight turn of the head to the local funerary sculpture in Palmyra, mainly Greco- (viewer’s) left. Roman and Parthian, as a result of commercial and political relations. The idea of the portrait bust and The stone is a poor-quality marble with black veins, many of its elements is in fact a Roman tradition, cracks, impurities and visible crystals.28 Weathering has while the frontality, patterning and tendencies towards caused some yellowing all over the head, but generally abstraction are typical of Parthian art.24 The various its condition is excellent. A number of vertical and features from these traditions were combined, through horizontal cut marks on the right side of the head the medium of the Roman model, to create a new and reveal the white colour of the marble beneath. The unique type of portraiture that is distinctly Palmyrene vertical cuts are marks made by the original sculptor and that expressed the prestige and cultural affiliations using either the flat or curved chisel, as Palmyrene of the urban elite who had become wealthy under sculptors seldom removed the marks of their tools.29 Roman rule.25 The horizontal cuts are more like rough gashes, probably made later during removal of the head from THE PALMYRENE HEAD IN CANTERBURY its original context. Other signs of ancient tool-work MUSEUM are evident in the faint scratch marks covering the Description face, indicative of the curved chisel used for finishing The Palmyrene head in the collection of Canterbury work. Finally, there are red paint traces on the top of Museum, which is carved in marble, is 20.6cm in height, the modius, throughout the garland wreath, above the 9.5cm in width and 15.8cm in diameter and thus right ear and by the left vertical groove of the modius. slightly under life size (Pl 9).26 It has been broken off at Palmyrene sculpture was commonly painted and red the neck and reinforced with the addition of a mortar was used abundantly, even to colour entire faces.30 An base, and has a large piece of stone still attached to the unidentifiable rusty yellow mark on the left side of the back (Pl 10). The object depicts a young man wearing chin may be a later intrusion. the modius (6.5cm high), the cylindrical headgear of Palmyrene priests.27 There are two vertical furrows In sum, the head illustrates the typical style of carved into the front of the cap, and a laurel wreath Palmyrene portraiture, with its large eyes, simplified surrounds the modius and contains a central rosette with features, blank expression, frontality, rigidity and six petals (Pl 11). Beneath the edge of the modius there lack of individualism.31 Fortunately, the distinctive is a continuous horizontal groove. The top of the cap headgear provides us with clues as to the identity of the is rougher than the rest of the face, which is ovoid and individual portrayed. has an ageless and androgynous quality (Pl 9). The eyes are large, oval and not incised, but they have heavily Identification defined eyelids, and the eyebrows, which are indicated The individual portrayed in this sculpted head is by curved grooves, echo their shape. There is a clear unquestionably a priest given the modius or distinctive 52 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

cylindrical cap, which was worn only by Palmyrene the wreath was an honour one attained.46 Furthermore, priests.32 Numerous sculpted examples of priests a banquet relief from the Hypogeum of Artaban shows are known from funerary sculpture in tombs (Pl a priest about to be crowned with a wreath, again 6a-b) and reliefs from sanctuaries, in which they are placing emphasis on the act of crowning.47 shown performing religious acts, such as sacrifices.33 Inscriptions accompanying images on tesserae (small Every man who is represented wearing the modius is terracotta squares used as admission tickets to sacred also beardless, and there is no indication of hair under feasts) identify them as priests.34 A similar priestly the cap. Such a custom of shaving the head and face headdress was in use in Hellenistic Phoenicia, while appears to have been common for these priests.48 There a modius-like cap was a sign of dignity reserved for are several men who are represented with a modius satraps (provincial governors in the ancient Persian beside them on a cushion or pillar, but they are always 35 49 empire). Colledge identifies the two vertical furrows bearded, such as the funerary relief bust of Iarh. ai. on the modius as seams, indicating an attached cloth, Ingholt suggests that these men belonged to a lower while the curved groove below represents a skullcap rank within the clergy, or else died before they were able worn beneath.36 Stucky suggests that the modius was to wear the modius, as all such images are in a funerary made of felt.37 Some modii were left unadorned, while context.50 However, these theories are difficult to prove others, like that on the head in question, were encircled given that so little is known of the structure of the with wreaths of laurel, olive or oak.38 These wreaths priesthoods in Palmyra.51 were tied on with ribbons, as the undecorated band around the left side of the head suggests (Pl 13). Due The priests of Palmyra belonged to the city’s to traces of gilding found on the wreath of one modius, various sanctuaries and enjoyed a high status within Stucky believes that in reality the foliage of these the community.52 They are mainly represented as wreaths was made of gold.39 Some wreaths on modii attending the cultic feasts (marzēhā) at the sanctuaries, carried medallions with miniature busts in them, either which played an important social and political role, of priests or bearded men.40 These miniature busts may and performing sacrifices to the gods. 53 The former have represented the priest’s ancestors, or as Ingholt has activity is indicated by tesserae and inscriptions, while suggested, may have marked status either within the the latter is shown in several reliefs, such as those from city or the religious hierarchy.41 Many wreaths carried a the Temple of Bel, where priests pour incense on the central rosette, a common Palmyrene floral motif, like flame of a thymiaterion (incense burner).54 The priests the one found on the Canterbury Museum head.42 depicted in the funerary busts from the tombs hold other cultic objects related to religious duties such as Scholars have debated the use of wreaths on modii, laurel sprigs, bowls, alabastra (oil flasks), incense boxes, and several theories persist. Gawlikowski considers unguentaria (perfume bottles) and the schedula (a slip them to be the sign of apotheosis of dead priests, of papyrus).55 while Ingholt thinks they are signs of priestly dignity.43 While Gawlikowski’s theory is attractive, he has not Original Context considered those priests whose modii lack wreaths. Despite the poor quality of the marble of the head, the Stucky believes the different foliage used on the wreaths surface is well preserved and all the features are intact. It indicates devotion to different gods.44 He suggests that is likely that the sculpture originally stood inside, rather olive was for the priests of Baalshamin and laurel was than outside, where it was protected from damage by for the priests of Bel, as these are most frequent both in the desert wind and sandblasting. Given the amount the decorative foliage found on architectural features in of funerary sculpture in Palmyra, it most probably sanctuaries and on the tesserae related to the different originates from a tomb, where the atmospheric cults.45 It is possible that the different wreaths signified moisture gradually caused the discolouration. The ranks within the religious cult, such as the high priest stone mass at the back of the head appears to have or symposiarch. A relief from the sanctuary of Nebû been left there as a support and to prevent breakage supports this view, where a grandson places a laurel at the neck. Its unfinished quality and the yellow wreath on the modius of his grandfather, suggesting that discolouration throughout the stone support this view. Wadeson – Funerary Portrait Of A Palmyrene Priest 53

If it had been broken off a relief then the marble at the We cannot be certain of more details of the original back would appear rougher and would be whiter than context of the head under discussion. What is certain, the rest of the head. The stone mass would not have however, is that the main individuals portrayed been visible, since the head was meant to be viewed reclining in the banquet reliefs were prominent and frontally. Similar stones masses are found on the back affluent members of Palmyrene society given the size of priests reclining in banquet reliefs from the Tomb of the sculpture, the contrast of the smaller, subsidiary of ‘Alainê and the Hypogeum of Shalamallat, where figures, the position in the tomb and the inscriptions the figures are carved almost in the round.56 Therefore, naming them.65 It may be that these priests held the given these observations, and the size and form of the position of symposiarch (leader of the feasts) during head, it is probable that it originates from the body their lifetimes, which subsequently accorded them such of a priest reclining in a banquet relief or on the lid prominence in the funerary context. of his sarcophagus in a prominent position in the tomb.57 As mentioned above, these sculptural groups Date were often reserved for the tomb owners and heads of Ingholt was the first scholar to establish a dating system the families, and were placed prominently at the back for the Palmyrene portraits based upon stylistic details of the chambers in specially created niches, or on the and dated inscriptions.66 Colledge later modified facades of the tower tombs (Pls 6a-b, 7). The banquet this classification, and this is still widely used in relief, carved on a sizeable rectangular slab, sometimes scholarship.67 According to certain facial features and also sealed a number of loculi. The main figure, usually other details, the Canterbury Museum head belongs a priest dressed in Parthian costume, typically reclines to Colledge’s Subdivision N in Group Three, which on a sculpted couch, with his right hand resting on would indicate that it was produced between 200 his knee and his left hand holding laurel wreaths or and 273 CE.68 These features include the unincised banqueting items (Pls 6b, 8).58 To his right, his family eyes, the single curved grooves for the eyebrows and are usually depicted as smaller, subsidiary figures. the presence of the tear ducts, which only appear on In other examples, two priests recline together, as in sculpted portraits after 150 CE.69 Other indications that the Tomb of ‘Alainê.59 Although we call these groups support such a date are the marks of the curved and flat reliefs, the heads and shoulders of the figures are often chisel on the neck, which were commonly used tools freestanding. in the third century CE, as well as the appearance of the laurel wreath, which only occurred after 140 CE.70 These banquet reliefs were sometimes placed around Furthermore, as mentioned above, the third century three sides of the chamber to recreate a real banquet in was the most popular period for the production of triclinium form. Such an arrangement was also made funerary banquet reliefs with figures carved fully in the with the sarcophagi that carried banquet reliefs on their round.71 lids.60 This practice was especially popular in the third century CE, when sculptors began to carve the scenes on CONCLUSION the sarcophagi lids fully in the round.61 Representing the The Palmyrene head at Canterbury Museum represents deceased as a reclining banqueter was a common motif a priest and was probably produced in the third century in the ancient world.62 In this way, the dead could be CE. It was originally attached to a figure reclining either seen to enjoy the act of feasting for eternity. However, it in a banquet relief or on the lid of a sarcophagus placed is not clear whether their own funerary feasts are being in a central position of a tomb at Palmyra. As is indicated recalled, or the cultic feasts they attended when they by numerous other examples, these figures of priests were alive.63 Since priests are so often found in these held banqueting utensils and wore an elaborate, brightly banquet scenes, it is likely that they are linked to religious painted Parthian outfit. They were normally part of activities during their lifetime.64 As suggested by the a group sculpture with family members, and had an large amount of tesserae discovered in the sanctuaries, inscription providing a name and a date. The affluence cultic feasts were important religious services in the city. of this priest is suggested by the size of the sculpture and Therefore, it is unsurprising that we find priests depicted the use of marble. As a priest, he would have enjoyed in this act in their tombs. a high status within Palmyrene society and played an 54 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

important religious, social and political role in the life of 9 Gawlikowski 2005, 50; For burial practices in the tombs, the city. One such duty was participation in the sacred see Saito 2005. banquets, which this priest enjoyed for eternity by being 10 Colledge 1976, 198-199, pls 115-118. represented in a banquet scene in his tomb. 11 Colledge 1976, 89. 12 Colledge 1976, 62; Morehart 1956-57, 75. END NOTES 13 These inscriptions, mainly written in Palmyrene 1 Research for this article initially occurred as part of the Aramaic, record the name of the deceased, his or her author’s BA (Hons) thesis in the Department of Classics at ancestors and usually a date. They have not only enabled the University of Canterbury in 2002. I am most grateful to scholars to trace the development of the sculpture, but also my supervisor, Alison Griffith (University of Canterbury) allowed the formation of genealogical tables of Palmyrene and to Roger Fyfe (Senior Curator, Canterbury Museum) families, for example see tables in Bounni & Sadurska 1994. who made the sculpture available for study. I would For clothing and gestures, see Heyn 2008 and 2010. also like to thank the following scholars for their help 14 See for example the funerary portrait of Aqmê with her and advice during this research: Waleed Asa’ad, Khaled children (Istanbul 3751): Colledge 1976, 187, pl 83; Heyn Al-As’ad, Lidewijde de Jong, Susan Downey, Robert Duff, 2010, 635-636. Elisabeth Fontan, Maura Heyn, Norton Hiller, Ted Kaizer, 15 See for example the funerary portrait of the priest and Doug Neil. In addition, I would like to acknowledge Wahballat (Toronto Royal Ontario Museum 425): Colledge the National Museum of Damascus for their helpful 1976, 82, pl 66. comments on the artefact, and Keble College (University of 16 Colledge 1976, 58; Gawlikowski 2005, 53. 17 Oxford) for funding a trip to study the Palmyrene funerary See an image of the reconstruction of the Tomb of Iarh. ai sculpture at the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen, in in Browning 1979, 199, pl 140. 2008. 18 For discussion, see Colledge 1976, 73-78. 2 A project has recently been initiated at the University 19 Heyn 2008, 175-176. of Aarhus to catalogue and study all known Palmyrene 20 Gawlikowski 2005, 54. funerary portraits as one corpus: http://projects.au.dk/ 21 Will 1951, 70. palmyraportrait/project/. 22 See for example Heyn 2008, 171, pl 6-1. 3 Related Documents, EA1980.282, Canterbury Museum. 23 Heyn 2008, 170-193. 4 We know that a statue of Odenathus was erected in 24 Colledge 1976, 138; Heyn 2008, 170, 172; 2010, 634. For the main Colonnaded Street in Palmyra according to Roman funerary portraits, see Kleiner 1977; Ingholt 1954; a surviving inscription on one of the columns: CIS Seyrig 1950, 4. For a discussion on the development of ii.3946. Ingholt (1976, 115) identified two sculpted Palmyrene sculpture, see Morehart 1956-57, 52-83. heads as representing Odenathus (one from the Ny 25 Heyn 2010, 635, 644. Carlsberg Glyptotek in Copenhagen and the other from 26 The width was taken at the widest point around the ears. the Archaeological Museum in Istanbul) due to their The top of the head measures 37.5cm in width, while the monumentality and regal countenance. However, the bottom measures 29cm. unknown context and lack of epigraphic evidence make 27 A modius is originally a Roman grain measure, but the such an identification difficult to prove (Ploug 1995, 227; term is used by modern scholars to describe these caps due Hartmann 2001, 87). For the life and career of Odenathus, to similarities in appearance. see Smith 2013, 131; Yon 2002, 143-150; Gawlikowski 1985, 28 While most of the Palmyrene sculpture is carved from 251-261. limestone, the quarries of which are 15 km north-east 5 Wright 1895, 127-130. from the city (Schmidt-Colinet 1995, 53), marble was also 6 Heyn 2010, 631. available from quarries in the region of as-Sukkari and 7 A lengthy bibliography exists for Palmyrene tombs. For Bazurieh, 22 km to the south (Bounni & al-As’ad 1982, a summary of recent scholarship, see Saito 2005, 151-153. 128-129). Dodge (1988, 223) describes this marble as one Gawlikowski (2005, 44-73) also provides an up-to-date of poor quality, with crystals varying in size and black veins review of the tomb architecture. See also Schmidt-Colinet running throughout, that weathers to a honey colour. This 1997, 159-170. description matches the condition of the stone of our head. 8 Gawlikowski 2005, 47. The identification as marble was also confirmed by Norton Wadeson – Funerary Portrait Of A Palmyrene Priest 55

Hiller, former geologist of Canterbury Museum. refers to the head of a priest that once originated from a 29 Colledge 1976, 111. sculptural group atop a sarcophagus lid: 1995, 69-70, pl 12. 30 Colledge 1976, 119. For example, there is a head of a 58 A well-preserved example can be seen outside the priest painted with a red face and red wreath, and black Palmyra Museum: Heyn 2008, 173, pl 6-2. For the costume pupils, eyebrows and cap in the Palmyra Museum (Cat 111, of the banqueters, see Heyn 2008, 183-189. 1959). 59 Sadurska & Bounni 1994, 172-179. 31 Morehart 1956-57, 75-76, 79; Colledge 1976, 218. 60 For example in the Tomb of Maqqai (229 CE): Colledge 32 Colledge 1976, 140; Taha 1982, 119; Kaizer 2002, 235-236. 1976, 194, pl 102. 33 For example on reliefs from the Temple of Bel: see 61 Colledge 1976, 77; Heyn 2008, 181-183. Colledge 1976, 36, Fig 14. 62 See Heyn (2008, 182) for discussion of the banqueting 34 Ingholt et al. 1955. For images of priests, see Pls 35-36. motif. 35 Stucky 1973, 176. 63 Colledge 1976, 132. 36 Colledge 1976, 140. 64 Heyn 2008, 181-183. 37 Stucky 1973, 172. 65 Heyn 2008, 182. 38 For types of modius, see Colledge 1976, 246. 66 Ingholt 1928. 39 Stucky 1973, 173. 67 Colledge 1976, 245-264. 40 Many examples of such wreaths can be found in the Ny 68 Colledge 1976, 251-252. For other priest heads from Carlsberg Glyptotek Museum in Copenhagen (for example banquet reliefs belonging to this chronological group, see Ploug 1995, 167 Cat no 66, 104, 236). Ploug 1995 (nos. 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111). 41 Ingholt 1934, 34, n 27. Such wreaths with medallions 69 Colledge 1976, 69. are also found on the heads of men without modii. Ingholt 70 Colledge 1976, 111, 140. suggests they are symbols of distinction given by the city or 71 Colledge 1976, 77, 241. by religious authorities. 42 For another example, see the 2nd century CE bust of REFERENCES a priest (Cat No. 23) from the Hypogeum of Artaban: Bounni A, Al-As’ad K (1982) Palmyre: Histoire, Bounni & Sadurska 1994, 28, fig 70. Monuments et Musée. Damascus. 43 Gawlikowski 1966, 76; Ingholt 1934, 35. For more recent Bounni A, Sadurska A (1994) Les Sculptures Funéraires interpretations, see Rumscheid 2000, 93-108. de Palmyre. Giorgio Bretschneider Editore, Rome. 44 Stucky 1973, 178. Browning I (1979) Palmyra. Chatto & Windus, London. 45 Stucky 1973, 179. See also discussion in Heyn 2008, Colledge M A R (1976) The Art of Palmyra. Thames & 188-190. Hudson, London. 46 Colledge 1976, 41 Pl 21 (Palmyra Museum 2228/7957); Dodge H (1988) Palmyra and the Roman marble trade: Stucky 1973, 167. evidence from the baths of Diocletian. Levant 20: 47 Heyn 2010, 641, Pl 8; Bounni & Sadurska 1994, 184, 215-230. 48 Heyn 2008, 184. Gawlikowski M (1966) Les prêtres de Palmyre. 49 Colledge 1976, 86, pl 79 (Louvre 2398). Problèmes d’iconographie. Studia Palmyrenskie I. 50 Ingholt 1954. Gawlikowski M (1985) Les princes de Palmyre. Syria: 51 Kaizer 2002, 258. Revue d’art oriental et d’archeologie 62: 251-261. 52 For discussion on the Palmyrene priesthood, see Kaizer Gawlikowski M (2005) The city of the dead. In: Cussini 2002, 234-243. E (ed) A Journey to Palmyra: Collected Essays to 53 Kaizer 2002, 165, 221-229, 235, 257. Remember Delbert R Hillers, pp 44-73, Brill, Leiden. 54 Seyrig 1934, 154-86, pls 18, 23; Heyn 2008, 186. Hartmann U (2001) Das palmyrenische Teilreich. Steiner, 55 For example Heyn 2010, 642, fig 10 (Pittsfield, Stuttgart. Massachusetts, Berkshire Museum, inv no. 1903.7.2). See Heyn M K (2008) Sacerdotal activities and Parthian Heyn 2010, 642-643. dress in Roman Palmyra. In: Colburn C S and Heyn 56 Tanabe 1986, pl 398. M K (eds) Reading a Dynamic Canvas: Adornment 57 Parlasca notes how the heads were often knocked in the Ancient Mediterranean World, pp 170-193, off such reliefs to be sold on the antiquities market. He Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle. 56 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

Heyn M K (2010) Gesture and identity in the funerary Stucky R A (1973) Pretres Syriens I: Palmyre. Syria: art of Palmyra. American Journal of Archaeology Revue d’art oriental et d’archeologie 50: 163-180. 114.4: 631-666. Taha A (1982) Men’s costume in Palmyra. Les Annales Ingholt H (1928) Studier Over Palmyrensk Skulptur. CA Archéologiques Arabes Syriennes 32: 117-132. Reitzels Forlag, Copenhagen. Tanabe K ed (1986) Sculptures of Palmyra I. The Ancient Ingholt H (1934) Palmyrene sculptures in Beirut. Orient Museum, Tokyo. Berytus Archaeological Studies 1: 32-43. Will E (1951) Le Relief de la tour de Kithôt et le banquet Ingholt H (1954) Palmyrene and Gandharan Sculpture. funéraire à Palmyre. Syria 28: 70-100. Yale University Art Gallery, New Haven. Wright W (1895) Palmyra and Zenobia. Thomas Nelson Ingholt H (1976) Palmyre Bilan et Perspectives. Colloque & Sons, London. de Strasbourg (18-20 Octobre, 1973), Université des Yon J-B (2002) Les notables des Palmyre. L’institut Sciences Humaines de Strasbourg 3: 101-137. français de Proche-Orient, Beirut. Ingholt H, Seyrig H, Caquot A (1955) Recueil des Tessères de Palmyre (RTP). Imprimerie Nationale, Librairie Orientaliste Paul Geuthner, Paris. Kaizer T (2002) The Religious Life of Palmyra. Steiner, Stuttgart. Kleiner D E E (1977) Roman Group Portraiture: The Funerary Reliefs of the Late Republic and Early Empire. Garland Publishing Inc, New York and London. Morehart M (1956-57) Early sculpture at Palmyra. Berytus Archaeological Studies 12: 52-83. Parlasca K (1995) Some problems of Palmyrene plastic art. ARAM 7.1: 59-71. Ploug G (1995) Catalogue of the Palmyrene Sculptures, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek. Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen. Rumscheid J (2000) Kranz und Krone: zu Insignien, Siegespreisen und Ehrenzeichen der römischen Kaiserzeit. Wasmuth, Tübingen. Saito K (2005) Palmyrene burial practices from funerary goods. In: Cussini E (ed.) A Journey to Palmyra: Collected Essays to Remember Delbert R Hillers, pp 150-165, Brill, Leiden. Schmidt-Colinet A (1995) The quarries of Palmyra. ARAM 7.1: 53-58. Schmidt-Colinet A (1997) Aspects of romanization: the tomb architecture at Palmyra and its decoration. In: Alcock S E (ed) The Early Roman Empire in the East, pp 157-177, Oxbow, Oxford. Seyrig H (1934) Antiquités syriennes 17: Bas-reliefs monumentaux du temple de Bel à Palmyre. Syria: 154-86 ( Reprinted in Antiquités Syriennes II, 9-39). Seyrig H (1950) Palmyra and the East. Journal of Roman Studies 40: 1-7. Smith A (2013) Roman Palmyra: Identity, Community and State Formation. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Wadeson – Funerary Portrait Of A Palmyrene Priest 57

Pl 1: The Near East and Egypt (Map by A Wilkins). Pl 2: Temple Tomb no 86 at the end of the Colonnaded Street, Palmyra (Photograph by L Wadeson).

Pl 3: Tower tombs in the ‘Valley of the Tombs’, Palmyra (Photograph by L Wadeson). 58 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

Pl 5: Mid-2nd century AD funerary portrait of a man, Palmyra (Photograph by A Kropp; courtesy of Palmyra Museum)

Pl 4: Loculi (burial compartments) in a Palmyrene tomb (Photograph by L Wadeson; courtesy of Palmyra Museum).

Pl 6b: Banquet group (detail) in the Tomb of Borpha and Bôlhâ, Palmyra (Photograph by L Wadeson; courtesy of Palmyra Museum).

Pl 6a: Banquet group in the Tomb of Borpha and Bôlhâ, Palmyra Pl 7: Banquet relief on the Tomb of Kithôt, Palmyra (Photograph (Photograph by L Wadeson; courtesy of Palmyra Museum). by L Wadeson). Wadeson – Funerary Portrait Of A Palmyrene Priest 59

Pl 8: Reclining banqueter in Parthian costume in the Tomb of Pl 9: Palmyrene sculpted head (front view), Canterbury Museum Elahbêl, Palmyra (Photograph by L Wadeson; courtesy of (Courtesy of Canterbury Museum). Palmyra Museum).

Pl 10: Palmyrene sculpted head (back view), Canterbury Museum Pl 11: Palmyrene sculpted head (detail of wreath), Canterbury (Courtesy of Canterbury Museum). Museum (Courtesy of Canterbury Museum).

Pl 12: Palmyrene sculpted head (right side), Canterbury Museum Pl 13: Palmyrene sculpted head (left side), Canterbury Museum (Courtesy of Canterbury Museum). (Courtesy of Canterbury Museum).

Records of the Canterbury Museum, 2014, Vol. 28: 61-63 © Canterbury Museum 2014

The type specimen ofArgiope leucopicta Urquhart, 1890 (Araneae: Araneidae)

COR J VINK Canterbury Museum, Rolleston Avenue, Christchurch 8013 [email protected]

ABSTRACT The holotype of Argiope leucopicta Urquhart, 1890 Fiji Argiope leucopicta was collected from. Levi (1983) (= Cyrtophora leucopicta (Urquhart, 1890)) has been transferred Argiope leucopicta to Cyrtophora Simon, located at Canterbury Museum. An examination of this 1864, based on its eye arrangement and abdominal specimen shows that C. leucopicta is a junior synonym colour pattern and stated that the holotype of Argiope of Cyrtophora moluccensis (Doleschall, 1857). leucopicta was not in the Canterbury Museum, where Urquhart’s types are housed, or the Otago Museum, KEY WORDS which houses New Zealand’s largest collection of Argiope leucopicta; Cyrtophora leucopicta; Cyrtophora spiders. The holotype of Argiope leucopicta was not moluccensis; Fijian spider; holotype; synonymy. included in the list of arachnid primary types held at Canterbury Museum (Nicholls et al 2000); it was INTRODUCTION subsequently found and assigned Canterbury Museum Arthur Torrane Urquhart was New Zealand’s first accession number 2005.135.90 in 2005. resident arachnologist who described almost 200 species of New Zealand spiders (Nicholls et al 2000). METHODS On 21 December 1899, what remained of his collection The epigynum of the holotype of Argiope leucopicta was was gifted to Canterbury Museum and Nicholls et al photographed using a Nikon DS-Ri1 digital microscope (2000) listed 84 of Urquhart’s type specimens as being camera mounted on a Nikon AZ100M stereo held there. Urquhart (1890) also described Argiope microscope and images were focus-stacked using NIS- leucopicta Urquhart, 1890 from Fiji, which he originally Elements D (Nikon Imaging Software). The holotype spelt as Argiope leuco-picta. Urquhart’s description specimen was photographed using a Canon EOS 5D was based on a single female specimen given to him Mark II Digital SLR camera with a 100 mm macro by P Goyen, an Inspector of Schools in Otago who lens, which was mounted on a StackShot electronically also published several papers on New Zealand spiders controlled macro-rail and the images were focus- (Forster 1967). Urquhart (1890) did not state how stacked using Helicon Focus version 5.3. the specimen came into Goyen’s care or what part of 62 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 28, 2014

SYNONYMY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Below is a partial synonymy. A full synonymy can be I am grateful to Phil Sirvid and Jennifer Twist (Museum found in Platnick (2014). of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa) for providing Cyrtophora moluccensis (Doleschall, 1857) samples of Urquhart’s handwriting for comparison, to Sarah Murray (Canterbury Museum) for advice on Epeira moluccensis Doleschall 1857: 418 comparing handwriting and to Kyle Davis (Canterbury (description of female; type from Amboina [now Museum) for assistance with the StackShot system. Ambon Island, Indonesia], not found according to Thanks to Phil Sirvid and Volker Framenau for their Tanikawa et al 2010, therefore not examined). comments on the manuscript.

Argiope leuco-picta Urquhart 1890: 234 (description REFERENCES of female; holotype female from Fiji, Canterbury Evenhius N L (2007) Checklist of Araneae of Fiji. Museum 2005.135.90, examined). New synonymy. Bishop Museum Technical Report 38(2): 1–11. Forster R R (1967) The spiders of New Zealand. Part I. I have examined the holotype of Argiope leucopicta Otago Museum Bulletin 1: 1–124. and identified it asCyrtophora moluccensis (Doleschall, Levi H W (1983) The orb-weaver generaArgiope, 1857). The epigynum (Fig 1) is consistent with the Gea, and Neogea from the western Pacific region illustration of C. moluccensis in Tanikawa et al (2010: (Araneae: Araneidae, Argiopinae). Bulletin of the fig 13) and the median septum of the epigymun in Museum of Comparative Zoology 150: 247–338. lateral view is curved, which separates it from the Marples B J (1959) Spiders from Some Pacific Islands, closely related Cyrtophora ikomosanensis (Bösenberg & III. The Kingdom of Tonga.Pacific Science13: Strand, 1906) (see Tanikawa et al 2010: Figs 9–11). The 362–367. abdominal pattern also matches figure 2 in Tanikawa Marples B J (1960) Spiders from Some Pacific Islands, et al (2010); however, there is overlap in the abdominal Part IV. The Cook Islands and Niue.Pacific Science pattern of C. moluccensis and C. ikomosanensis, as the 14: 382–388. latter species is variable (Tanikawa et al 2010). The Marples B J (1964) Spiders from some Pacific Islands, specimen is in good condition (Fig 2) considering its part V. Pacific Science18: 399–410. age, although not all legs are attached. A label written in Nicholls D C, Sirvid P J, Pollard S D, Walker M (2000) what appears to be Urquhart’s handwriting (Fig 3) was A list of arachnid primary types held in Canterbury found in the vial with the holotype specimen. Museum. Records of the Canterbury Museum 14: 37–48. DISTRIBUTION Platnick N I (2014) The World Spider Catalog, version Cyrtophora moluccensis is found from India to Japan, 14.5. URL: Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Australia (Tanikawa et al http://research.amnh.org/iz/spiders/catalog/ 2010; Platnick 2014) and tropical islands in the South Tanikawa A, Chang Y-H, Tso I-M (2010) Taxonomic Pacific (Marples 1960, 1964; Tanikawa et al 2010). It has revision of Taiwanese and Japanese Cyrtophora been previously recorded from Fiji (Evenhius 2007) and spiders hitherto identified withC. moluccensis neighbouring Tonga (Marples 1959). (Arachnida, Araneae), using molecular and morphological data. Acta Arachnologica 59: 31–38. Urquhart A T (1890) Description of a new species of Argiope, from Fiji. Transactions of the New Zealand Institute 22: 234–236. Vink – The type specimen ofArgiope leucopicta Urquhart, 1890 (Araneae: Araneidae) 63

Fig 1: Epigynum of the holotype specimen of Argiope leucopicta

Fig 2: The holotype specimen ofArgiope leucopicta.

Fig 3: Label in Urquhart’s handwriting found with the holotype specimen of Argiope leucopicta. 64 Records of the Canterbury Museum, Volume 27, 2013

Instructions for Authors

Records of the Canterbury Museum publishes original papers and review articles on the Museum’s collections or on topics related to the collections. Original papers must present results that are essentially new and that have not been published or are not being considered for publication elsewhere. Reviews should cover a topic of current interest and present new insights or conclusions. All manuscripts are subject to peer review.

Authors should submit an electronic copy of each manuscript on disc or as an email attachment in MS Word, to the editors. Good quality copies of all illustrations should accompany each manuscript in the correct format in the first place. Failure to do so may result in manuscripts being returned for revision and may not be able to be printed in the edition they have been submitted for.

Authors should contact Canterbury Museum for information regarding writing guidelines.

Manuscripts are accepted for publication throughout the year. If you require further information, please email [email protected]

Manuscripts are to be sent to either the email address above, or to: Records of Canterbury Museum Canterbury Museum Rolleston Avenue Christchurch 8013 New Zealand

Telephone: +64 3 366 5000 Fax: +64 3 366 5622