Roman Portraits on Cypriot grave reliefs

Cahiers du Centre d’Études Chypriotes 39, 2009 ROMAN PORTRAITS ON CYPRIOT GRAVE RELIEFS1 Elena POYIADJI-RICHTER Résumé. Le matériel qui a été retrouvé montre que la production de stèles funéraires avec des représentations humaines n’a jamais cessé à Chypre de l’époque archaïque jusqu’à la période romaine. Tandis que l’île recevait les influences étrangères (de Grèce, d’Asie Mineure, d’Égypte, etc.), les sculpteurs chypriotes ont développé leur propre tradition stylistique et l’ont poursuivie à travers les siècles. Cette communication porte sur les reliefs funéraires à portraits trouvés à Chypre et datés de l’époque romaine. Les objectifs principaux sont de rechercher les influences des portraits venus de Rome, ou des centres culturels voisins, d’identifier les parallèles entre les portraits chypriotes exécutés en relief ou en ronde bosse, de façon à déterminer s’ils proviennent d’un même atelier, ou d’officines différentes. On essaiera aussi d’identifier le contexte social du défunt. The study of Roman grave reliefs constituted part of my doctoral thesis,2 where I investigated Cypriot funerary reliefs in general, from the Archaic to the Roman period. Results from my thesis showed a continuous production and development of grave monuments with representations of human figures. The study, however, also gave rise to further questions, which needed to be addressed separately. One of these forms the subject of the paper presented here, which focuses on portraits or, more precisely, portrait-like representations of figures on Roman grave reliefs. It is evident, that great emphasis was given to the manufacturing and detailed rendering of the portraits of the deceased and the accompanying figures, while the shape 1. I would like to congratulate the organizers for the successful Conference and to thank particularly Prof. D. Michaelides for the invitation to present my research work. Further I would like to thank Prof. Hermary and the Centre d’Études Chypriotes for giving me the opportunity to publish this work. For permission to use the photographic material my thanks go to Dr. M. Hadjicosti, Director of the Department of Antiquities of Cyprus, Dr. Ch. Hadjichristodoulou, Curator of the Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation, Dr. L. Fitton, Curator of the Department of Greek and Roman Art of the British Museum, Dr. B. André-Salvini, Director of the Department of Near Eastern Antiquities of the Louvre, Mrs H. Taylor, Assistant Registrar of the John and Mable Ringling Museum, Sarasota, and the Image Libray of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Finally, I would like to thank Prof. V. Karageorghis and Prof. A. Mehl for their helpful remarks. 2. Pogiatzi 2003a. 178 ccec 39, 2009 of the body, the clothing and the other additional elements of the representation retained a secondary importance and were represented in a simple and more schematic style. The adoption of foreign elements and their amalgamation with the local tradition, a characteristic of Cypriot sculpture in general, is also reflected in the portraits of the figures on the grave reliefs. This feature demands a closer examination and provides an opportunity to investigate further questions regarding workshop production and the similarities of the portraits with sculptures in the round of the same period; or even the social background of the deceased – all within the limits imposed by the data, as far as the data allows for since the grave reliefs were removed from their original sepulchral context. Of the 27 Roman grave reliefs with human figures that I am aware of which were found on Cyprus and are located in museums on the island and overseas, only 14 can be taken into consideration in the discussion. The heads of these are preserved in a very good condition, and thus their evaluation and analysis can yield reliable results. These portraits depict 15 men and 6 women. Seven reliefs are preserved almost complete and seven are fragmentary. All 14 originate from central Cyprus: seven from Golgoi, one from Tremithousia, one from Pera (Asproyi), one from Alambra, while four are of unknown provenance. In fact most of the 27 Roman reliefs come from the central regions of the island. All the reliefs are carved from the soft white or yellow-white limestone, deriving from the bedrock of the Mesaoria plain. This is easily worked and it is used for most of the Cypriot sculpture. The size of the reliefs is monumental, a feature observed only during the Roman period, and all figures are worked in high relief. The grave reliefs Monumental grave relief with a banquet scene. Golgoi, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 74.51.2487. H. 92cm, W. 78cm, D. 26.5cm. (Fig. 1)3 Two male figures are represented within a niche in a gesture of dexiosis. The one on the right is lying on a kline, stretching out to the side, the other is sitting on it. In the past some reconstruction took place, including the noses of the figures, and, erroneously, the blocking of the holes for the wreaths on the either side of the heads. Monumental grave relief with three figures. Tremithousia (near Golgoi), London, British Museum C 431 H. 98cm, W. 88cm, D. 23.5cm. (Fig. 2)4 The depiction of two men and a woman placed in a niche seems to represent a banquet scene. The man to the right is perhaps stretched out to the side and the other two figures are sitting on a kline. The scene probably depicts a couple with their son 3. Pogiatzi 2003a, p. 140-141, cat. no. 43, pl. XXVI; 2003b, p. 73-88, pl. 9.2. 4. Pogiatzi 2003a, p. 141-142, cat. no. 44, pl. XXVI; 2003b, p. 84, fig. 2; Poyiadji-Richter 2007, p. 218. e. poyiadji-richter, roman portraits 179 between them, in the centre. The lower half of the stele with the legs of the two sitting figures is missing. Grave relief with four figures. Golgoi, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 74.51.2483. H. 148cm, W. 99.7cm, D. 33cm. (Fig. 3)5 The representation of three men and a woman within the niche resembles a banquet scene. Once again, the man to the right is stretched out to the side, while the others are sitting on the kline in front of the legs of the reclined man. The scene depicts probably again a couple with their two sons. Grave relief of a woman. Golgoi, Paris, Louvre MNB 2029. H. 149cm, W. 72cm, D. 33.5cm. (Fig. 4)6 A sitting woman worked out almost in-the-round is depicted frontally, in the center of a deep niche. Grave relief of a woman. Pera (Asproyi), Nicosia, Cyprus Museum 1940/V-25/11. H. 147cm, W. 63cm, D. 18.5cm. (Fig. 5)7 The grave relief shows a standing woman represented frontally in high-relief, and taking up almost the entire scene. Cippus of Markus. Unknown provenance, Nicosia, Cyprus Museum Ins.GR. 372. H. 118cm, Diameter 54cm. (Fig. 6)8 The portrait of Markus is depicted on the cippus, his name mentioned in the inscription at the base: ΜΑΡΚΕ ΧΡΗΣΤΕ ΧΑΙΡΕ. The flaking and chipping of the cippus compromise the portrait at the upper part of the head as well as the nose. Cippus of Kratea. Alambra, New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art 74.51.2413. H. 149cm, W. 72cm, D. 33.5cm. (Fig. 7)9 On the cippus the portrait of Kratea is depicted, with her name written on the inscription at the base of the cippus: ΚΡΑΤΗΑ ΧΡΗCΤΗ ΧΑΙΡΕ. 5. Pogiatzi 2003a, p. 139-140, cat. no. 41, pl. XXV; Poyiadji-Richter 2007, p. 218. 6. Pogiatzi 2003a, p. 189-190, cat. no. 104, pl. LVIII and LIX. 7. Ibid., p. 190-191, cat. no. 105, pl. LIX. 8. Ibid., p. 184-185, cat. no. 97, pl. LV. 9. Ibid., p. 185, cat. no. 98, pl. LVI. 180 ccec 39, 2009 Stelae fragments Fragmentary grave relief with banquet scene. (Fig. 8)10 Unknown provenance, Nicosia, Cyprus Museum E 696. H. 99cm. Two joining fragments of a grave relief show part of a banquet scene with two men lying on a kline, as well as the heads of two smaller figures. The two men lie next to each other in frontal view with their legs stretched to the left. Only the head of the figure on the right survives, marred by some chipping on the nose and chin. Fragment of a grave relief. (Fig. 9)11 Golgoi, Sarasota, John and Mable Ringling Museum SN 28.1900. H. 56.7cm. A male portrait is preserved next to the right edge of a niche. Fragment of a grave relief. Golgoi, Sarasota, John and Mable Ringling Museum SN 28.1745. H. 37cm. (Fig. 10)12 A male portrait is preserved near the right edge of a niche. It has suffered damage on the forehead, nose and chin. Fragment of a grave relief. Golgoi, Sarasota, John and Mable Ringling Museum SN 28.1786 H. 36.5cm. (Fig. 11)13 A frontal female portrait in high relief is preserved near the left edge of a niche. Male head. Unknown provenance, Paris, Louvre AM 1171. H. 17.3cm. (Fig. 12)14 A male head in high relief, detached from the background of the relief, is turned to the right in a three quarter view. Male head. (Fig. 13)15 Unknown provenance, Nicosia, George and Nefeli Giabra Pierides. Collection, Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation cat.no. 268. H. 19.7cm. A frontal male head in high relief is detached from the background of the relief. 10. Pogiatzi 2003a, p. 138-139, cat. no. 40, pl. XXIV; 2003b, p. 84-85. 11. Pogiatzi 2003a, p. 146-147, cat. no. 51, pl. XXX. 12. Ibid., p. 147, cat. no. 52, pl. XXX. 13. Ibid., p. 200-201, cat. no. 121, pl. LXVII. 14. Ibid., p. 197-198, cat. no. 116, pl. LXV. 15. Ibid., p. 198, cat. no. 117, pl. LXVI. e. poyiadji-richter, roman portraits Male head. Golgoi, Paris, Louvre AM 3462. H. 17.5cm. 181 (Fig. 14)16 A male head in high relief, detached from the background of the relief, is turned to the right in a three quarter view. Typological and chronological classification Until 1983, the grave relief from Tremithousia (Fig. 2) was considered a reference work for the 3rd century B.C. However, first R. Senff17 and then V. Tatton-Brown18 disproved this attribution and dated the relief with convincing arguments to the period of Tiberius and Caligula. Some of the arguments, which relate directly to the portraits, will be elucidated below. Faces and hairstyle can be classified to the early imperial period. The flat and clinging hair of the men is divided into elongated strands, which are arranged fork-like above the forehead. The hairstyle of the man in the center essentially resembles the main type of Caligula portrait.19 Starting from a wide fork-shaped parting of curls above the forehead, the strands are combed regularly to the sides. The shape of the faces and its proportions can also be associated with the Caligula portrait. The strikingly high forehead, the flat cheek area and the straight mouth with the small lips are typical of portraits of the emperor. Another indication is the characteristic wreath worn by the man to the right, consisting of a ribbon, on which two clusters of stylized triangular ivy leaves and two corymbs placed above the forehead are attached. According to R. Senff and V. Tatton-Brown, this type of wreath was not known before the Roman period, and more precisely the earlier part of the first century, and was probably of a Cypriot workmanship.20 Such wreaths can be found on other limestone heads, like one in the Cesnola collection of the John and Mable Ringling Museum21, and one in the Archaeological Museum of Constantinople22, both of which probably belonged to grave reliefs originally. Laurel wreaths in general appear only rarely on grave reliefs. The one on the head in the middle has thin paratactically set leaves and was in use on Cypriot portrait sculptures during the first century B.C. and the Julio-Claudian period.23 16. Ibid., p. 199, cat. no. 119, pl. LXVI. 17. Senff 1983, p. 35-37. 18. Tatton-Brown 1989, p. 133-134. 19. Senff 1983, p. 36. 20. Senff 1983 p. 37; Tatton-Brown 1989, p. 134. 21. SN 28.1608: Cesnola 1885, pl. XCIII, no. 618. 22. Erg�lec 1972, p. 35, no. 62, pl. 52. 23. Bruun-Lundgren 2002, p. 112. E.g. .g. male head in Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek inv. no. 2584: Connelly 1988, pl. 38, fig. 137, cat. no. 42. 182 ccec 39, 2009 The woman wears her hair parted in the middle, combed backwards and gathered in a bun at the back of the head. She is veiled with the upper edge of the himation and a close fitting scarf wears underneath. The majority of the female limestone heads have this hairstyle, which is basic and almost timeless.24 She wears earrings of the type of a disc with pendant in the shape of a winged Eros. This is a common type of earring during Hellenistic and Roman times in the eastern Mediterranean. It seems to have been popular in Cyprus during the transition from Hellenistic to Roman times as far as can judge from the contents of tombs in the Paphos area.25 The wrinkles around the nose hint at the advanced age of the woman. This detail excludes a dating of the stele in the Hellenistic period.26 The hairstyle, the proportions of the head and the facial features allow beyond any doubt a dating of these portraits in the period of Tiberius and Caligula. Two limestone male heads in the round from Golgoi – one in the Cyprus Museum in Nicosia27, the other in the Ny-Carlsberg Glypothek in Copenhagen28 – are stylistically close to the portraits on the grave relief from Tremithousia. The shape of the faces resembles that of the central figure on the grave relief; however, the hair on both heads is differently modelled above the forehead and arranged in the shape of a fork. Both heads were initially attributed to the Hellenistic period, but later research has shown that they date to the Roman and, more precisely, the Tiberian-Caligulian period. Three further fragments (Fig. 11-13) can be dated stylistically to the same period and can be considered as close parallels to the portraits of the Tremithousia relief. Like them, the two male heads (Fig. 12-13) display characteristic features of Caligula portraits, like the high forehead, the mask-like facial expression, the almond-shaped eyes and the stern mouth with the straight lips. Another variation of the hairstyle within the motif of forked hir-locks can be observed on a male head in the Louvre (Fig. 12), where the clinging strands above the forehead are formed of single rolled-in curls. The man here wears the same thin-leaved laurel wreath as the man in the centre of the Tremithousia relief. The headdress of the male portrait in the Giabra Pierides Collection (Fig. 13) is probably a torus shaped wreath. It is thick, with a rounded profile and gives the impression of depicting a ribbon. Such wreaths also occur on funerary busts.29 24. Bruun-Lundgren 2002, p. 111. 25. Tatton-Brown 1989, p. 134 fig. 8; Pierides 1971, pl. XXXII, 5-6; Deppert-Lippitz 1985, p. 19 no. 43, pl. 18. 26. Senff 1983, p. 37. 27. Inv. no. 1959/II-9/1 Nicosia, Cyprus Museum: Senff 1983, p. 40; Connelly 1988, cat. no. 43, fig. 139, pl. 38; Bruun-Lundgren 2002, cat. no. V 16, pl. 8. 28. Inv. no. 2584: Connelly 1988, pl. 38, fig. 137, cat. no. 42. 29. E.g. inv. no. 3448 Constantinople, Archaeological Museum: Erg�lec 1972, pl. LVII; BruunLundgren 2002, cat. no. F 33, pl. 37. e. poyiadji-richter, roman portraits 183 The female head in the Ringling Museum (Fig. 11) wears a band around the hair, which is parted in the middle, and which is covered with a himation, like the head of the older woman on the Tremithousia relief. Her features, like the high forehead, the almondshaped eyes, high cheeks and the stern, straight-lipped mouth, confirm her relationship to the Tremithousia relief and allow a dating in the first half of the 1st century A.D. Holes are pierced through the panel on either side of the head. They probably served for nails or same other fitting for attaching a wreath across the front of the head, possibly during certain celebrations at the tomb.30 Such holes can also be found on Greek grave stelae,31 as well as on several Cypriot grave relief heads.32 The mask-like representation of the faces of the two male figures on the banquet scene from Golgoi (Fig. 1a) resembles those of the Tremithousia relief; however, small differences are evident in some details of the facial features and the hairstyle. The transitions from the eyebrows to the root of the nose as well as the shape of the lips are smoother and more rounded. The hair of both men is also differently modelled: flatter and directed from the temples towards the middle; with a motif of forked locks forming above the forehead. This hair arrangement and the cuspidate faces with rounded eyebrows and slightly opened mouth are features that resemble a Claudian prince from Edirne from Asia Minor.33 The same style can be found on funerary busts, especially on a male one from Cyprus now in the Louvre.34 Other Cypriote funerary busts35 exhibit the same Claudian hairstyle, which seems to be standard schematic motif around the middle of the 1st century A.D. The general dating of funerary busts to the 1st century A.D. is confirmed by M. Bruun-Lundgren36 in her dissertation about the Cypriot portrait. According to her, the usage of these busts was abandoned around the end of the Julio-Claudian period. The wreath of the man to the right (Fig. 1b) displays characteristic features, such as the asymmetrically overlapping, backwards-pointing broad leaves, seemingly of laurels; and the spherical bud placed above the middle of the forehead. Similar leave wreaths are worn by male figures on Palmyrian grave reliefs, but there they are decorated with a rosette or emblem above the forehead. However, they have been dated later than the Cypriot examples, to the second half of the 2nd century A.D.37 This wreath combination of laurel leaves and a bud appears to be unique to Cyprus and Cypriot grave reliefs in particular. This wreath could be mistaken for the known Dionysian wreath with ivy and 30. Fabricius 1999, p. 238. 31. Conze 1893-1906, -1906, no. 77, 803, 1055, 1207, 1282; Clairmont 1993, no. 2.950, 3.846. 32. Pogiatzi 2003a, cat. no. 48, 50, 85, 90, 91, 107. 33. Inan, Alf�ldi-Rosenbaum �ldi-Rosenbaum Rosenbaum 1979, p. 86, no. 34, pl. 27. 34. Senff 1983, p. 29-30, pl. 52-53; Hermary 1989, p. 67, no. 102. 35. Inv.no. GR.304-1892, Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum; Connelly 1988, fig. 19, pl. 5; Bruun-Lundgren 2002, cat.no. F 23, pl. 32. 36. Bruun-Lundgren 2002, p. 218-219. 37. Teixidor, Dentzer-Feydy 1993, p. 194, fig. 195; p. 216, fig. 213; p. 244 fig. 237. 184 ccec 39, 2009 corymbs. However, the well preserved shape of the laurel leaves allows a clear distinction and its classification as a Cypriot laurel wreath. The man to the left wears a torus-shaped wreath, like the male head of the Giabra Pierides Collection (Fig. 13). The portraits on two relief fragments, one in the Cyprus Museum (Fig. 8), the other in the Ringling Museum (Fig. 10) are similar to that of the man of the banquet scene because of the hairstyle with the forked lock motif, the identical finish of the facial features and the peculiar form of the wreath. A third fragment (Fig. 9), now in Sarasota, may also belong to this group of portraits. The features are identical to those of the men on the banquet scene, however, the hairstyle is modelled in single undulating strands. The man wears a wreath with, exceptionnally, three buds: one as usual above the middle of the forehead and one left aeither side above the temples. The portraits on the grave relief from Golgoi (Fig. 3) are also related to the Tremithousia-relief but are slightly later in date. The short forehead, the small round eyes, the high and full cheeks, the somewhat podgy tip of the nose, the small mouth as well as the double chin of the man on the right are features uncommon to the previous portraits and are rather reminiscent of images of Nero.38 On the basis of these portrait characteristics, a dating can be made to the late Julio-Claudian period. The three male figures wear a rosette wreath – the most popular kind of wreath among local male portraits on reliefs and funerary busts which has nothing to do with Roman imperial crowns. This wreath type consists of one row of petals, tightly knit together. Presumably, because of their symbolism of regeneration, blossoms are frequently represented in a funerary context. Stylistic as well as iconographic similarities with the portraits of the two young men of the Golgoi relief are observed on a contemporary funerary bust in the National Archaeological Museum of Athens.39 It has a similar hairstyle and shape of face, and wears a rosette wreath, like the two young men on the relief. A head in the round from Arsos displays strong similarities with the female head on the grave relief.40 These include, besides the standard hairstyle and the himation over the head, the shape of the face and the facial features. In my opinion, this head has been wrongly dated to the Hellenistic period in older literature. Another example can be added to this group. This is an asymmetrically worked head from a grave relief (Fig. 14) that still exhibits the previously mentioned basic characteristics of Nero portraits and is therefore to be dated to the same period as the four portraits on the banquet scene. Like all male heads, this one too wears a wreath. The majority of males with a wreathed head belong to the banquet-scene motif, where not only the reclining man but also all male participants are wreathed. When the banquet 38. Bergmann, �anker 1981, p. 324 ff., fig. 6 a-c. 39. Inv. no. 1835 Athens, National Archaeological Museum: Karageorghis 2003, cat. no. 232. 40. Gjerstad et al. 1937, pl. CXCIX, 7. e. poyiadji-richter, roman portraits 185 scene motif went out of fashion after the Julio-Claudian period, the wreath disappeared from grave reliefs. The portrait of the woman on the grave relief from Pera (Fig. 5) is dated, on the basis of her hairstyle, to the 1st half of the first century A.D. The undulated, parted hair is smooth above the forehead and exhibits volutes at the sides. Single, fine strands of hair fall over the cheeks, and two longer strands descent along the neck. This hairstyle is reminiscent of portraits of Agrippina the Younger41 as well as the Cypriot Agrippina from Soloi.42 Despite the somewhat simpler workmanship of the Pera portrait, the similarities of the facial features, like the low forehead, the large eyes, the long nose and cheeks as well as the stern mouth with straight lips, are clearly discernable. The next example of a female portrait is of high quality and very well preserved (Fig. 4). Her characteristic “honey-comb” coiffure with high toupee is very well known since the Flavian period.43 Below the honeycomb toupee she wears an extra row of crescent-shaped curls that frame the forehead, a detail that is found in contemporary imperial art. During the Flavian/Trajanic and later periods, female limestone heads are either bare-headed or discreetly veiled, the veil just covering the occiput of the head, allowing for their elaborate hairstyles to be seen. It consists of lots of small curls, each with a hole in the middle made with a drill, the use of which is more frequently during these periods. This hairstyle is also recognizable in the �oilos Monument44 dating to the 1st century A.D., and on a marble fragment of a head from Salamis.45 She also wears a large turban-like hair bun, consisting of a long plait wound around the whole of the crown of the head. This is a new trait in the fashion, which appears among the marble portraits in Rome around 110 A.D.46 The use of this fashionable hairstyle indicates that its direct source of inspiration were the coiffures of elegant ladies in the surrounding metropoleis. The expressionless face with idealized traits was adopted from Roman portraits of the Trajanic court. She wears a Flavian-Trajanic necklace which consists of four different strings hanging low down on the chest, and fitting well the deep V-shaped décolleté. Contemporary Egyptian painted mummy-portraits offer good parallels for similar types of combined necklaces.47 A pendant hangs from each of the srings of the necklace. The upper pendant is square, the two following are oval with a raised rim, and the lowest is crescent-shaped pointing downwards. The last type seems to have been in use in the eastern part of the 41. Fittschen, �anker 1983, no. 7. 42. Gjerstad et al. 1937, pl. CLVI, 4. 43. Portraits of Iulia Titi: Johansen 1994, p. 42-43, no. 10. 44. 74.51.2490 New York, Metropolitan Museum of Art; Karageorghis et al. 2000, p. 267, cat. no. 431. 45. Karageorghis 1964, p. 39, no. 41, pl. XXXIX, 3. 46. �anker 1983, p. 54-55, no. 70. 47. Parlasca 1966, pl. 18.2; Parlasca, Seemann 1999, nos. 205, 218. 186 ccec 39, 2009 Empire and is also found in Egypt.48 Several pendants of this kind are known from Cyprus.49 The earrings, consisting of a convex round disc with pendants of three parallel vertical rows of small pearls or round beads clustered together, are timeless. The portrait of Markus (Fig. 6) is a typical example of the Antonine period featuring a broad face, compact bulk of hair with locks and, most notably, the characteristic corkscrew locks at the beard. These were adopted from marble sculpture of the time and resemble the beard of the earlier Marcus Aurelius portraits.50 Similar features and hairstyle are observed on a Cypriot head in the Archaeological Museum of Constantinople.51 The hair of Kratea (Fig. 7), with the parting in the middle and the uniform undulating strands that cover the ears, is reminiscent of fashionable hairstyles of the middle and late Antonine period, like that of Faustina Minor.52 The necklace in the décolleté displays single, oblong, presumably semi-precious stones and a disk-shaped pendant acting as an amulet, a feature widespread in the Roman world. Despite the provincial workmanship, the shape of the face, the high cheeks and the facial expression also bear resemblance to portraits of Faustina Minor and thereby confirm the dating of the portrait to the late 2nd century A.D. Status and Identity With the exception of the already-mentioned cippi, the grave reliefs do not carry inscriptions, and thus there is no hint as to the social status or the identity of the persons depicted. What was the ethnicity of the deceased, where they Romans or locals with a Roman citizenship? What was their social, public or professional status? Ιn a distant province such as Cyprus, a direct influence from Rome was limited. According to Cicero,53 there were few Roman cives on the island and no Roman troops were stationed there – something that is supported by the epigraphic evidence from the island.54 The inscriptions yield little information regarding the official status of Cypriote citizens in general, and there are only some references to certain professions such as doctors, philosophers and musicians.55 According to T.B. Mitford, the reward in terms of Roman citizenship was poor on the island. Some freedmen, men of wealth and local distinction, like gymnasiarchs and priests, are known from Salamis, but Roman citizenship was very rare in the 1st and 2nd century A.D. Although there were “Roman” businessmen 48. On mummy portrait, Parlasca, Seeman 1999 nos. 205, 218. 49. Cesnola 1884, p. 108, fig. 118; Karageorghis et al. 2000, p. 244, no.432. 50. Senff 1983, p. 50; portrait of Marcus Aurelius: Fittschen, �anker 1983 p. 71. 51. Inv. no. 3379 Constantinople, Archaeological Museum: Erg�lec 1972, p. 34, pl. LIV. 52. Fittschen, �anker 1983, pl. 138-9, no. 111; pl. 142, no. 113. 53. Oberhummer 1924, col. 105, referring to Cicero, Ad Atticum 5, 21.6. 54. Bruun-Lundgren 2002, p. 254f. 55. Mitford 1980, p. 1346. e. poyiadji-richter, roman portraits 187 in some communities such as Paphos, others were peregrini dominating the social and civic life of the 1st century A.D. Cyprus, but did not have Roman citizenship. Even later, lthough Caracalla gave citizenship to all the free male inhabitants of the Empire, the Cypriot reaction was minimal.56 Some 600 funerary inscriptions on undecorated cippi prove that they belong to persons of the middle and indeed the upper orders, and include gymnasiarchs and doctors. However, only three belong to Roman citizens.57 Therefore, it can be assumed that the portraits on grave reliefs presumably represent citizens of the island belonging to a prosperous local upper class, while the probability of Romans being depicted is rather low. Although provincial, this class maintained strong ties with the outside world. Even though the portraits are often typified or rather idealized portrait-like representations rather than physiognomically accurate representations of the deceased and their family members, and the motivation seems to have been to emulate the portraits of the Imperial court, the persons were no doubt recognized as individuals by their contemporaries, presumably through a painted or incised inscription, which is no longer preserved. It is, most likely, no coincidence that the women on these reliefs, as a rule, wear jewellery, most notably the one on the detailed relief in the Louvre (Fig. 4). It seems that it was important for this circle of society to demonstrate the wealth of the family in this manner. The woman in the Louvre could easily be identified as someone from an upper class, or at least from a wealthy family, or as a Roman woman who lived in Cyprus.58 Considering the cost of manufacturing a stele of monumental size with high relief and emphasis on the portraits of the figures, it can be assumed that customers of grave reliefs were people with a corresponding range of economic resources in the society. The portrait demonstrated not only the prosperity of the deceased and his family but his social status as well. Another important subject, which relates to the fame and in a wider sense, to the high social status and wealth of the deceased and the persons accompanying him, is the positioningt of these large monuments. These were not built into the architectural fabric of a tomb (as in Rome), but were instead placed free-standing to be visible in the necropolis, as was also the case with the grave reliefs in Asia Minor.59 In this way their role was not only to indicate the tomb but also to emphasize the high status of a wealthy citizen. Given the lack of adequate evidence, it is risky to draw further conclusions regarding the social status of the persons depicted on these reliefs. 56. Ibid., p. 1362-63. 57. Ibid., p. 1365. 58. Of the hundreds of Roman grave epigraphs found in Cyprus, over a third are dedicated to women. In some cases, the name of a woman coming from a ruling family of the city is written; less frequently the name of a priestess or a Roman lady from senatorial family, who lived on Cyprus, is encountered: Mitford 1980 p. 1369-70. 59. Cormack 1997, p. 147-148. 188 ccec 39, 2009 Workshops Several stylistic and iconographic similarities were observed between portraits of funerary busts, and those of grave reliefs that come mainly from Golgoi and the surrounding areas. This is,perhaps, not coincidental but indicates that they derive from the same workshop or group of workshops since they are similar both in general likeness of the facial features and in the way they have been sculptured. As argued by M. Bruun-Lundgren60 and V. Karageorghis,61 funerary busts are not actual portraits but were made after set patterns. The same argument should be applicable also to the representations on grave reliefs of the same, Julio-Claudian period. We cannot exclude the possibility that the reliefs were already partly pre-manufactured when the customer made his choice. By applying several modifications, the grave relief could be customized to suit the demands of the client. This phenomenon has been observed in earlier periods, but there is also an example of a grave relief from Rome now in the Getty Museum,62 which allows for this kind of speculation, since the portrait does not relate at all to the deceased. The inscription refers to a girl by the name Agrippina for whom the parents placed the grave relief. The portrait, however, represents a ten- to twelve-year-old boy. It would seem that the parents used an existing relief and just had the inscription changed to the adequate wording. Conclusions All the portraits on the Cypriot grave reliefs retain a number of characteristics that are typical for all regions of the Eastern Mediterranean. These include the hairstyle that follows the fashion of the period and the imitation of imperial portraits combined with the local tradition and perception. This applies to both votive and funerary Cypriot sculpture. Several of the works examined exhibit stylistic and iconographic similarities, and they probably all derive from the same workshop or group of workshops in or around Golgoi. As to the status and the identity of the deceased, it can be assumed that they were citizens of the island belonging to a local, prosperous class of a high social or even official status, while the customers of grave reliefs were people with a corresponding range of economic resources. The Leventis Municipal Museum, Nicosia BIBLIOGRAPHY Bergmann (M.), Zanker (P.), 1981, “Damnatio memoriae. Umgearbeitete Nero- und Domitianporträts”, Jdl 96, p. 317-412. Bruun-Lundgren (M.) 2002, Cypriots in Stone, Limestone sculpture in late Hellenistic and Roman Cyprus. unpublished Doctoral Thesis, University of Gothenburg. cesnoLa (a. paLma di), 1884, Salaminia, London. 60. Bruun-Lundgren 2002, p. 209-212. 61. Karageorghis 2003, p. 140f. 62. Inv. no. 71.AA.456, Malibu, The J.Paul Getty Museum-Koch 1988, p. 83. e. poyiadji-richter, roman portraits cesnoLa (L. paLma di), 1885, A Descriptive Atlas of the Cesnola Collection of Cypriote Antiquities in the Metropolitan Musum of Art, New York. cLairmont (ch.W.), 1993, Classical Attic Tombstones, Kilchberg. conneLLy (J.B.), 1988, Votive Sculpture of Hellenistic Cyprus, New York. conZe (A.), 1893-1922, Die attische Grabsreliefs, vol. I-IV, Berlin. cormack (S.), 1997, “Funerary Monuments and Mortuary Practice in Roman Asia Minor”, in S.E. Alcockk (ed.), The Early Roman Empire in the East, Oxford. deppert-LippitZ (B.) 1985, Goldschmuck der Römerzeit im Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseum, Mainz. ergüLec (H.), 1972, Corpus of Cypriote Antiquities 4, Large-sized Cypriot Sculpture in the Archaeological Museum of Istanbul, G�teborg. FaBricius (J.), 1999, Die hellenistischen Totenmahlreliefs, M�nchen. Fittschen (k.), Zanker (P.), 1983, Katalog der römischen Porträts in den Capitolinischen Museen und den anderen kommunalen Sammlungen der Stadt Rom III, M�nchen. gjerstad (e.) et al., (1937), The Swedish Cyprus Expedition. Finds and Results of the Excavations in Cyprus 1927-1931, Stockholm, Vol. III. hermary (A.), 1989, Musée du Louvre, Département des antiquités orientales. Les antiquités de Chypre : Sculptures, Paris. inan (j.), aLFöLdi-rosenBaum (E.), 1979, Römische und frühbyzantinische Porträtplastik aus der Türkei. Neue Funde, Mainz. johansen (F.), 1994, Catalogue of Roman Portraits II, Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen. karageorghis (V.), 1964, Sculptures from Salamis I, Nicosia. karageorghis (V.), 2003, Cypriote Art in the National Archaeological Museum of Athens, Nicosia. 189 karageorghis (V.) et al., 2000, Ancient Art from Cyprus. The Cesnola Collection in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. koch (G.), 1988, Roman funerary sculptures, Catalogue of the Collection, Malibu, Ca. mitFord (T.B.), 1980, “Roman Cyprus”, ANRW II 7, 2, Berlin, p. 1285-1384. oBerhummer (E), 1924, “Kypros”, RE vol. XII, p. 59-117. parLasca (K.), 1966, Mumienporträts und verwandte Denkmäler, Wiesbaden. parLasca (k.), seemann (H.), 1999, Augenblicke, Mumienporträts und ägyptische Grabkunst aus römischen Zeit, Frankfurt. pierides (A.), 1971, Jewellery in the Cyprus Museum, Nicosia. pogiatZi (E.), 2003a, Die Grabreliefs auf Zypern, von der archaischen bis zur römischen Zeit, M�hnesee. pogiatZi (E.), 2003b, “Das Gelage auf zyprischen Grabreliefs”, in V. Karageorghis, S. Rogge (eds.), Junge zyprische Archäologie, M�nster, p. 73-88, pl. 8-9. poyiadji-richter (E.), 2007, “Ta kupriakav nekrovdeipna : To epituvmbio anavglufo th~ sullogh~ tou Pagkuprivou Gumnasivou”, RDAC, p. 211-224. senFF (R.), 1983, Datierungsprobleme der späthellenistischen und römischen Kalksteinplastik aus Zypern, unpublished Master Thesis, M�nchen. tatton-Brown (V.), 1989, “Varia: Matters arising from the Preparations for the A.G. Leventis Gallery”, in V. Tatton-Brown (ed.), Cyprus and the East Mediterranean in the Iron Age, London, p. 132-145. teixidor (J.), DentZer-Feydy (J.), 1993, Les antiquités de Palmyre au Musée du Louvre, Département des Antiquités Orientales, Paris. Zanker (P.), 1983, Provinzielle Kaiserporträts. Zur Rezeption der Selbstdarstellung des Princeps, M�nchen. 190 ccec 39, 2009 a b Figure 1. Grave relief with a banquet scene. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Cesnola Collection, Purchased by subscription, 1874-76 (74.51.2487). Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. e. poyiadji-richter, roman portraits 191 a Figure 2. Grave relief with three figures. b London, British Museum C 431. Photo: British Museum. Figure 3. Grave relief with four figures. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Cesnola Collection, Purchased by subscription, 1874-76 (74.51.2483). Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. a b 192 ccec 39, 2009 a b Figure 4. Grave relief of a woman. Paris, Louvre MNB 2029. Photo: E. Poyiadji-Richter. Figure 5. Grave relief of a woman. Nicosia, Cyprus Museum 1940/V-25/11. Photo: Cyprus Museum. a b e. poyiadji-richter, roman portraits a 193 b Figure 6. Cippus of Markus. Nicosia, Cyprus Museum Ins. GR. 372. Photo: Cyprus Museum. b a Figure 7. Cippus of Kratea. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Cesnola Collection, Purchased by subscription, 1874-76 (74.51.2413). Image © The Metropolitan Museum of Art. 194 ccec 39, 2009 b Figure 8. Fragmentary grave relief with banquet scene. Nicosia, Cyprus Museum E 696. Photo: E. Poyiadji-Richter. a Figure 9. Fragment of a grave relief. Sarasota, John and Mable Ringling Museum SN 28.1900. Photo: E. Poyiadji-Richter. e. poyiadji-richter, roman portraits 195 Figure 10. Fragment of a grave relief. Sarasota, John and Mable Ringling Museum SN 28.1745. Photo: E. Poyiadji-Richter. Figure 11. Fragment of a grave relief. Sarasota, John and Mable Ringling Museum SN 28.1786. Photo: E. Poyiadji-Richter. Figure 12. Male head. Paris, Louvre AM 1171. Photo: E. Poyiadji-Richter. 196 ccec 39, 2009 Figure 13. Male head. Nicosia, G.and N. Giabra Pierides Collection, Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation cat. no. 268. Photo: Bank of Cyprus Cultural Foundation Figure 14. Male head. Paris, Louvre AM 3462. Photo: E. Poyiadji-Richter.