S T U D I A A R C H A E O L O G I C A 187 ANNA TROFIMOVA IMITATIO ALEXANDRI IN HELLENISTIC ART Portraits of Alexander the Great and Mythological Images «L’ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER ANNA TROFIMOVA ImitatiO Alexandri IN HELLENISTIC Art Portraits of Alexander the Great and Mythological Images © Copyright 2012 «L’ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER Via Cassiodoro, 19 - 00193 Roma http://www.lerma.it © Anna Trofimova English translation Paul Williams Progetto grafico «L’ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER Tutti i diritti risevati. È vietata la riproduzione di testi e illustrazioni senza il permesso scritto dell’Editore. Trofimova, Anna. Imitatio Alexandri in Hellenistic Art. - Roma : «L’ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER, 2012. - XVI + 192 p. : ill. ; 24 cm. (Studia Archaeologica ; 187) ISBN: 978-88-8265-753-6 CDD 709.01 1. Alessandro : Magno Cover: Part of a chariot with the head of a warrior. Greece (?). Early 3rd century BC. Bronze (see. Fig. 130). Back-cover: Phalar with gorgoneion. Eastern Mediterranean, Bosporan kingdom (?), 2nd century BC. Silver, gilding (see Fig. 156) (Photos: © The State Hermitage Museum). INDEX ■ FOREWORD .......................................................................................... pag. VII ■ INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... » XI ■ CHAPTER I The History of the Study of Portraits of Alexander the Great and the “subject of imitations”............ » 1 ■ CHAPTER II Alexander the Great in Hellenistic Art. The Image and the Reality..................................... » 15 ■ CHAPTER III The Influence of Portraits of Alexander on the Hellenistic Iconography of Achilles .................... » 33 ■ CHAPTER IV Alexander in the guise of Heracles and Heracles in the guise of Alexander............................ » 59 ■ CHAPTER V The evolution of the iconography of Dionysus and the myth of Alexander . » 81 ■ CHAPTER VI The Royal Image and Deities of the Heavenly Sphere in Hellenistic art Alexander and Helios, Apollo and the Dioscuri.................................................................................... » 103 ■ CHAPTER VII Alexander and the Giants of the Pergamon Frieze ................................................... » 125 ■ CHAPTER VIII The Alexander Type in the Hellenistic Iconography of Water Deities .................................. » 133 ■ CONCLUSION .......................................................................................... » 141 ■ FOOTNOTES........................................................................................... » 147 ■ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................... » 157 ■ ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................ » 159 ■ BIBLIOGRAPHY......................................................................................... » 163 ■ SOURCES ............................................................................................. » 181 ■ INDEX ............................................................................................... » 185 Index V Foreword It is a cliché that Alexander’s face was the works in the Hermitage and other Rus- most influential in history and the most sian museums; and its sympathetic ad- frequently honored in metal, stone, paint, dress to the extensive Russian literature and other media. Yet, amazingly, to my on these objects and on the topic as a knowledge this is the first comprehensive whole, largely unknown to most Western study of the impact of his uniquely rich scholars (this writer included) because of portrait tradition on the vast landscape of the language barrier. ancient divine and heroic imagery. Hith- A brisk but informative Introduction erto, scholars and critics have focused sets the stage, proposing that this “Al- largely on this tradition’s importance for exander component” filled Greek clas- Hellenistic and Roman ruler portraiture, sical mythology with new content and interspersed with occasional asides on its brought individuality into the iconogra- influence upon the private sphere. Their phy of heroes and gods. Resembling a relatively infrequent ventures into the Warburgian Pathosformel but not iden- territory covered by this book have con- tical with it, it was flexible, potent, and sisted largely either of studies of specific loaded with specific political, social, and iconographic types (for example, the god ethical meanings. As a result, “from the Helios) and individual works (e.g., the so- late fourth or early third centuries BC a called Aldobrandini Wedding), or of scat- historical personality − the image of a tered, ad hoc observations about them. human being − became a prototype” for Now, in a hundred and fifty dense- heroic and divine images (XI). To unpack ly packed, profusely illustrated, and well this unique and unprecedented develop- documented pages (the fruit of three ment, a choice array of theorists − includ- decades of intensive involvement with ing Gombrich, Eco, Gadamer, Baxandall, the subject), Anna Trofimova, curator of and Foucault − is mobilized in a quest Greek and Roman art at the Hermitage to define inter alia the key concepts of in St. Petersburg, has both mapped out “type”, “pattern”, and “imitation”, and their its topography and offered many chal- source in this particular case, namely, Al- lenging responses to its extensive array exander’s portraiture. “What is a portrait, of problems. For these reasons alone, a portrait image, and a type? What are the her book should be enthusiastically wel- components of the artistic language of comed − but there are plenty of others. portraiture? What are the specifics of the In particular, these include (but are not concepts of the individual and the ideal, limited to) its inclusive illustration and the unique, the particular, and the arche- detailed discussion of many unfamiliar typal?” (IX). What, in short, do these two Foreword VII key genres − heroes and gods − borrow imagery and his portraits (continuous- from Alexander’s vast and heterogeneous ly evolving through the end of antiquity) array of portraits, why, and to what effect? permeates and reciprocally enriches all of them, often to the point that when bodies Deferring these questions for the mo- and contexts are lost, heads cannot be se- ment, Chapters 1 and 2 then proceed curely identified as either one or the oth- to summarize and discuss the scholar- er: Alexander? Achilles? Alexander-Achil- ship on Alexander portraiture itself; the les? Achilles-Alexander? and so on. One Greek and Roman literary accounts of it; does not have to agree with all the au- and its surviving relics. The author’s cov- thor’s positions (for example, on the iden- erage of the scholarship is both broad tities of the Pasquino and “Eubouleus”, or and deep; her stance towards it is inde- the precise extent of the “Alexander com- pendently critical; and her grasp of the ponent” on Roman mythological frescoes, ancient testimonia is encyclopedic. (One Dionysiac sarcophagi, and other monu- of the book’s great strengths is its diligent ments) to appreciate both the value and citation of the written sources at all ap- fruitfulness of the observations and ideas propriate points). As to the survivors, the advanced in these three chapters. familiar and oft-rehearsed − but still nec- essary − litany of types and monuments Chapter 6 turns to the deities of the heav- is enlivened by occasional unconvention- ens: Helios, Apollo, and the Dioscuri. Since al asides such as this: “In contrast to earlier Alexander honored Helios for allowing scholars, I am strongly inclined to believe him to conquer the lands of the east, and that such depictions [i.e., the hunting Hellenistic folklore held that the sun nev- scenes at Vergina and on the Alexander er shone on those he failed to conquer Sarcophagus] can scarcely be taken as (this must have been news to their in- historical …, since the action occurs in habitants), it was natural that the image- the afterlife and the main personage is ry of the sun god and the Macedonian Roi the heroized deceased” (32). Soleil should soon merge. Apollo followed suit, as did the Dioskouroi, with whom Al- Chapters 3-5, the core of the book, show- exander had been compared even in his case the three figures most often associ- lifetime, in the notorious outburst of flat- ated with Alexander in the ancient sourc- tery in Sogdiana that preceded the dis- es, and whom he is said to have emulated astrous proskynesis debate. The chap- most fervently and consistently: Achilles, ter closes with the Dioscuri from Monte Herakles, and Dionysos. After thorough- Cavallo and three little-known bronzes in ly discussing their particular places in the the Hermitage, an ancient Etruscan one Greek imagination, and the evidence for (Etruria looms large in this chapter) and Alexander’s relationship and involvement two stunning eighteenth-century French with each of them, she turns to the mon- ones, dubbed “Europe” and America” − uments, both Greek and Roman. Each fig- but “The Dioscuri” or “Alexander taming ure − the peerless warrior, the laboring Bucephalus” would fit them just as well. superhero, and the inspired, almost mes- sianic divinity − contributed to and illumi- Chapter 7 tackles the thorny question of nated the formation of a particular aspect the Alexander-like physiognomies and of Alexander’s character and thus his im- coiffures occasionally found on both age. The ongoing dialectic between their the Giants and Olympians of the Perga- VIII Imitatio