你在这里

胡里奥-克劳迪安·塞巴斯蒂安的大理石浮雕

胡里奥-克劳迪安·塞巴斯蒂安的大理石浮雕

由R.R.R.史密斯(壮阳药6)。 Pp。 xvi + 373,无花果275,b&请176.菲利普·冯·扎伯恩,达姆施塔特,2013年。€89.90。 ISBN 978-3-805-346054(布)。

评论者

This magnificent volume publishes the largest corpus of Early Imperial sculpture from the Greek East, discovered mostly between 1979 和1988. A splendid successor to Smith’s pioneering C.朱利叶斯·佐洛斯的纪念碑 (Aphrodisias 1 [Mainz 1993]), illustrated by numerous superb drawings, photomontages, 和high-quality black-and-white photographs, it qualifies as a masterpiece in every respect. Even more than its immediate predecessor, 罗马肖像 (Aphrodisias 2 [Mainz 2006]), it is a must for any library or serious student of Late 希腊化 和Roman art 和culture, 和its price is a steal.

跟随一个简短的作者’在第一章的序言中,讨论了该建筑群从成立到重新发现和发掘的历史。在处理了上下文,功能,捐助者,设计和执行方式之后,史密斯研究了其晚期古董的商业用途,基督教的污点,地震和其他破坏的冲击以及最终在公元7世纪的破坏。然后,第2章介绍了适当的雕塑程序,重点是像双面的屏幕一样的丙酮,上面有刻有帝国家族及其祖先肖像的雕刻底座,以及尚存的大理石雕塑。第3章–5代表这本书的核心,分别处理北楼的浮雕(A和B系列,以尼禄,诸神和帝国国家为特色);南楼的’第三个故事(C系列:神灵和皇帝);以及第二个故事的故事(D系列:英雄及其功绩)。正文以第6章结尾,总结了该项目,其对罗马皇帝和希腊英雄的倾向并置以及其作为省级政府的地位“take” 关于帝国的思想。随后是小碎片的附录,书目和索引,随后是近200个出色的黑白板。

This veritable cornucopia of riches raises far more issues 和questions than can be addressed in a brief review. I touch 上 上 ly a few that I consider key, omitting most points of disagreement.

  1. 背景:作为一项思想实验,如果其中一些面板单独出现在古物市场上,减去其刻有铭文的基数,未经证明,并且在挖掘时完全没有记录发现点信息(大部分),该怎么办?来自“ethnic” 和单独的神话建筑(B,D系列),或者甚至是其中一些神话人物和帝国的一两个(A,C系列),我们将它们分配给哪种建筑类型?在哪里?我们将如何重建它?我们可以确定多少个主题(例如,B1:Pirousti的民族,在第87页上进行了精彩讨论; C8:Nero,无头和亚美尼亚; D5:Poseidon和Aineias)?我们可以组合多少个序列(例如B2–B4:达卡安人,贝西人和克雷特人,通过试装架与他们的铭刻基地团聚[89]; C28–C30:Askklepios,Claudius,Hygieia陆地和海洋统治者)?我们本能地在Julio-Claudian时代以外找到多少个小组(例如,非常“Severan”C9NeikēSebastōn[144])?最后,我们猜想这座神秘失落的纪念碑有多少个建筑时期?说够了。
  2. Evidence, exposition, 和integration: In this era of theoretical 和methodological sophistication, it is sometimes forgotten that the first duty of the historian 和the archaeologist is to display the evidence. Smith publishes the Sebasteion’s architecture, inscriptions, 和sculptures together (though 不 its pottery, coins, 和small finds, which would have created a monster, 和in any case they pertain to its use phases, 不 its construction 和reconstruction); documents every significant fragment with full descriptions, drawings, 和photographs; 和writes in clear, lucid prose. With all the evidence properly displayed in checkable form (e.g., B2–B4, noted above), we can assess his conclusions 和reconstructions rationally 和objectively. He produces no rabbits from his vast stock of hats 和hides none either.
  3. Technique: Smith devotes a dense section of chapter 1 to the processes of carving, lifting, 和fitting the reliefs (37–41, fig. 14 [a superb exploded drawing]) 和includes thorough technical descriptions with the catalogue entries for each inscription, panel, 和fragment. Many details of interest to specialists, however, such as the faceting of Claudius’ 遗憾的是,躯干(C29 [39])未显示,可能是出于经济考虑’s sake (pls. 88 和89 show 上 ly the full panel 和the heads). The number of carvers, workshop size(s), 和apportionment of the work are touched 上 in a few short paragraphs (revisited 310–11)可能会激怒其他人去史密斯更喜欢划桨的地方潜水。可能的光学校正(例如C29’s torso [171, 193, pl. 88]; cf. C24: Roma) 和paint traces are 不 discussed at all here, 和paint 上 ly rarely in the catalogue (e.g., D41: Atalante [259–60]).
  4. Iconography: The Nero 和pantheon 浮雕(A系列), peoples 和places (series B), 帝国的 family (series C), 和mythological scenes (series D) each expand our knowledge of these genres 和their histories, often in unexpected ways. Thus, for example, A1 (Nero 和Agrippina/Fortuna/Agathē Tychē) reworks the iconography of 帝国的 succession for a Greek provincial audience; 和A2 (Hēmera) appropriates the cascading “waterfall” drapery of the Pheidian Aphrodite Ourania 和its successors—史密斯一反常态地错过的典故,但壮阳药可能会因其在罗德岛的广泛传播而陷入困境(请参阅A. Stewart,“雅典集市的希腊化独立雕塑,第1部分:阿芙罗狄蒂,” 赫斯珀里亚 81 [2012] 272–73, 288–98)。 B1(Pirousti的民族)是 hapax; B2(达契亚人)可能与罗马著名的哈德里亚人系列有共同的渊源; B3(Bessi)将这个模糊主题的例子加倍。 C系列极大地增进了我们对早期帝国和英雄/神像的合相性的第二阶段Julio-Claudian的了解。因此,C8(Nero-Armenia)和C10(Claudius-Britannia)都巧妙地改造了晚期希腊化的Achilles-Penthesileia小组,该小组肯定位于小亚细亚的某个地方(第146页:在这两种情况下,Achilles都戴着假英雄阁楼头盔,不是哥林多人); C18中的皇帝结合了亚历山大式,奥法利乌斯(Ofellius)或他的同类,以及(Andros-Farnese)Hermes—他的伙伴引发了关于区分Dēmos,Synklētos和Genius的简短但有益的讨论(158); C29(克劳迪乌斯,陆地和海洋的统治者)简直令人叹为观止。最后,一些神话般的场景(D系列)是标准的,例如D4(埃涅阿斯的逃亡,但肯定是与Kreousa合作)’的鬼魂,而不是阿芙罗狄蒂[205],因为她没有脚,所以将右手放在Iulus上’ 担当新娘 拟南芥 gesture with her left hand [misunderstood in the text 和fig. 164]). Others are completely new. They include D1 (Ninos?; note his barbarian-style chiton-himation combination, shaggy beard, 和heroic circlet—not “扁圆角或王冠” [100]); D3 (young Anchises 和Aphrodite); 和D5 (Poseidon 和Aeneas, who [contra 207] suggestively wears a priest’s ankle-length sleeved chiton; so is the Poseidon a statue, as the dolphin 上 the ship [a support?] would suggest?). Others are compositionally novel (e.g., D12, D14: Deianeira, goddess [Atē?], centaurs); 和several evoke the lost glories of 希腊化 painting (D21: Agon; D28: Polyphemos-Galateia; D29: Io-Argos; D31: Apollo; D34: Orestes at Delphi; D37: Herakles-Antaios [cf. Philostr., 意马. 2.21]; D40, D41: Meleager; D43: Herakles-Prometheus; D44: nymphs 和child Dionysos; D45: Achilles-Penthesileia, 不 derived from the 希腊化 sculptural group; D46: Herakles-Telephos). Were D3–D5(埃涅阿斯循环)是从罗马绘画中借来的吗?
  5. 解释:三个中心章节都包括冗长的(但不是普罗克斯)提法的提要和解释性的讨论,每一个认真学习希腊文化和罗马艺术的学生都应阅读。它们包括“壮阳和罗马帝国的人民” (120–31),在这个主题上巧妙地区分了东方和西方的观点—这本书的主旋律;“Gods 和Emperors” (189–95)—though “allegories” (在标准词典定义中,“以另一人为幌子对某人进行形象化治疗,” 即谜语)这些场景不是;“pageants” 可能是一个更好的名词。至于它们比早期帝国大都市浮雕更突兀的幽默特征,可以与刻有宝石和浮雕的宝石进行比较,例如波士顿的奥古斯都-海王星,奥古斯塔的杰玛和大凯姆。ée(193)很适合并引起进一步的追捧,因为他们俩都是典型的希腊化主义者。“Myths 和Heroes” (291–307) 和“罗马皇帝和希腊英雄” (309–14)令人信服地强调所选主题的多重性;放弃通常的寻求总体图像程序的搜索;并取代一种更灵活(在历史上可行)的策略,将皇帝牢固,全面地置于希腊文化,其传统,邪教和文化的丰富多样的世界中。
  6. 风格:塞巴斯蒂安’希腊东方地区无与伦比的古典和希腊风格的雕塑风格。这部分是由于其庞大的规模(最初包括不少于206个小组,其中94个小组得以幸存),部分是由于其在时代的风俗和文化地位“Hellenistic” and “Roman.” Many reliefs, however, evidence a certain loss of fluency 和display even a stiltedness that Smith recognizes particularly in the “imperial” reliefs (series A–C [192–93, 298]) but also seems to infiltrate some of the mythological 上 es (e.g., D8: Hero 和Apollo; D37: Herakles 和Antaios). So is this phenomenon merely genre-bound? Is it a result of needing to hire so many carvers so quickly? Or is it a creeping side effect of the dominance of 帝国的 neoclassicism—a growing taste for monumentality 和formality across the board? Regardless, Smith’s exploration of this transitional moment between Greek/Hellenistic 和Roman 帝国的 art is truly a 佩里尼纪念碑.

安德鲁·斯图尔特
Graduate Group in Ancient History 和Mediterranean Archaeology
Departments of History of Art 和Classics
加州大学伯克利分校
加利福尼亚伯克利94720
astewart@berkeley.edu

的书评 胡里奥-克劳迪安·塞巴斯蒂安的大理石浮雕,由R.R.R.史密斯

由Andrew Stewart评论

美国考古学杂志 卷118,No.3(2014年7月)

在线发布于 www.ajaonline.org/book-review/1838

DOI:10.3764 / ajaonline1183。

添加新评论

纯文本

  • Web page addresses 和e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines 和paragraphs break automatically.