Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Μ. Ασία

αναλυτική αναζήτηση

 ΙΔΡΥΜΑ ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ
z
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Αναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΑΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΒΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΓΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΔΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΕΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΖΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΗΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΘΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΙΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΚΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΛΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΜΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΝΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΞΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΟΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΠΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΡΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΣΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΤΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΥΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΦΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΧΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΨΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα Ω

Ephesus (Antiquity), Parthian monument

Συγγραφή : Mallios Yorgos (10/2/2003)
Μετάφραση : Panourgia Klio

Για παραπομπή: Mallios Yorgos, "Ephesus (Antiquity), Parthian monument",
Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Μ. Ασία
URL: <http://www.ehw.gr/l.aspx?id=8219>
Έφεσος (Αρχαιότητα), Μνημείο Πάρθων (6/2/2006 v.1) Ephesus (Antiquity), Parthian monument (15/2/2006 v.1) 
 

1. Location

The location of the Parthian monument, which was erected by the town of Ephesus in honour of the triumphant victor against the Parthians Caesar Lucius Verus,1 has concerned the scholars greatly; they haven’t, however, yet reached a consensus. Most scholars accept that it is very possible the monument was erected in the center of the town near the library of Celsus, since many and well-preserved fragments from its sculptural decoration were found in the wider area. Nothing however was found in situ. Important was the discovery of U-shaped foundations on the south side of the library square which was convincingly interpreted by W. Jobst as a monumental altar.2 The same scholar thought that this altar is identified as the Parthian monument, which had been sought in this area. Although many lean towards this opinion,3 the lack of publications on both this new foundation and the Parthian monument in general has left many questions unanswered.4 Recently, F. Hueber returned to the subject, supporting the search for the location of the monument in the Olympieion complex, where Lucius Verus’ adopted father Hadrian5 was honoured. This opinion has not (yet) been accepted.

2. Architectural description and restoration

The architectural form of the Parthian monument is still very hypothetical. Only the slabs of two iconographical zones survive. One contains narrative scenes and the other is decorated with bucrania and garlands. Archaeometric studies showed that the monument’s reliefs were carved on dolomitic marble,6 possibly from Thasos.7 Some indications relating to the dimensions of the entire building can be discerned by a reconstruction of the relief friezes. Thus, according to the proposal by W. Oberleitner, the length of the frieze with the narrative themes reached 70 m. Of these, around 45 m., i.e. 2/3 of the slabs8 survive in good condition and are exhibited. Certain slabs have been identified as corners and have been placed at the beginning or the end of the monument’s walls. Judging by these, the largest part of the relief decoration covered the building’s exterior. The slabs have a height of approx. 2 m. and are defined at their top end by a tripartite – sometimes quadripartite– horizontal cornice. A total of 24 slabs9 survive from the decorative frieze with the bucrania and the garlands.

The most common reconstruction of the monument is that of an altar with an U-shapedground plan which stands on a tall socle.10 The socle basically supports a spacious courtyard at the center of which the main altar was placed, surrounded by a colonnade. Access to the altar’s courtyard was allowed via a monumental staircase on the open side. The reliefs decorated the high socle on two levels. The results of the excavations of the U-shaped foundations, mentioned above, to the south of the library square, are also of interest to the extent that it can be connected to or identified as the Parthian monument. The dimensions of the foundations are 22,20x8,40 m. On its north side is the monumental staircase 7,20 m. wide, which offered access to the main altar’s courtyard. According to W. Jobst’s reconstruction suggestion, the courtyard was enclosed to the south, west and east by a tall, marble wall decorated internally and externally by the reliefs on twolevels. On the lowest of these was the decorative frieze with the bucrania and garlands and on the higher were the friezes with the narrative representations.11

3. Sculptural decoration

Five thematic cycles connected to important events in the life of Caeasar L. Verus (161-169 AD), are represented on the relief friezes of the Parthian monument. These thematic cycles are: 1. Adoption, 2. Parthian war, 3. Personifications of towns of the Empire, 4. “Apotheosis of L. Verus, 5. Meeting of the gods.12

The placingof these compositions on the monument is, to a large extent, problematic. Following the new reconstruction by the main scholarof the monument W. Oberleitner, and under the supposition that the building had the form of a monumental altar, we could place the adoption scenes and the personifications of towns on each of the altar’s sides. The back, long side was possibly decorated with the scene of the Parthian war. The relief slabs which depict the “apotheosis” of L. Verus are placed on either side of the monumental staircase and the entrance to the altar’s courtyard. The location of the sculptural group depicting the meeting of the gods was possibly in the courtyard’s interior.13

3.1. Adoption

The first thematic cycle narrates the political act of adoption of Antoninus Pius (138-161 AD) and his successors, Marcus Aurelius (161-180 AD) and Lucius Verus (161-169 AD), by emperor Hadrian which took place during the last year of his reign, 138 AD. With the political act of adoption Hadrian transferred power to the respected senator Antoninus Pius and that latter respectively to M. Aurelius and L. Verus. According to Hadrian’s political testament, after their coming of age, M. Aurelius and L. Verus would have to rule together in a co-governance system.

Six relief slabs from the Adoption composition survive and have been restored.14 In the center of the central slab are depicted the new emperor Antoninus Pius (left) and the weakened, dying Hadrian (right) on either side of a scepter, symbol of the transferal of imperial power. Both, wearing Greek dress, cover their heads with the himation, characteristic of their leading position in the sacrifice taking place in the neighbouring slabs. To the left of Antoninus stands his future successor, the seventeen-year-old Marcus Aurelius, while the child on whose shoulder Hadrian leans is identified as L. Verus himself, son of Hadrian’s initial successor, Aelius Commodus Verus. The latter had died only two years previously, in 136 AD. The young figure that appears above Hadrian’s shoulder is identified as Genius, the allegorical representation of the Aelius Verus family. The imperial figures on the frieze are emphasized iconographically through their central positioning within the composition but also with the elevation of the ground on which their stand. On the other hand, the cornice which is tripartite over the rest of the scene becomes quadripartite over the central scene.

To the left of the central slab are represented certain dignitaries of the imperial court and four priestesses. The customary sacrifice of a bull takes place to the right of the adoption scene. The sacrifice takes place in three successive reliefs (only the middle relief survives intact), depicting the three basic stages: presentation of the bull (right), preparation for the sacrifice (middle) and sacrifice of the animal (left).

The right end of the representation is dedicated to the empresses Sabina, deified wife of Hadrian, and Faustina the Elder, wife of Antoninus Pius. Both are represented as goddesses, the first wearing a crown on her hair, the second covering her head with the himation and holding a cornucopia (horn of plenty) as Fortuna or Abuntantia. The little girl between them is no other that Faustina the Younger, daughter of Antoninus and future wife of M. Aurelius. Finally, on the same slab is preserved the trace of another imperial figure which remains unidentified.15

3.2. Parthian war

If L. Verus’ adoption is the first important event in his life, the victory of Roman forces under his command against the Parthians in 166 AD and the triumph which followed is surely the peak of his political career. Consequently, central position in the monument’s iconography is given to the frieze of the Parthian war.16 This representation, of which 8 slabs survive relatively intact, although imbued with the narrative and realistic spirit of Roman historical reliefs, does not aim at the precise historical representation of the particular battle. It is based on artistic rules which aim at a rendering of the timeless reality of war in general according to the Greek artistic perception. Most slabsof this representation adhere to each other; several sections however have not yet been completed. In its totality, this composition narrates the Roman counter-attack against the Parthians, which began in 162 and ended in 166 AD with the destruction of the Parthian capital Ctesiphon.

The frieze begins from the left with the scene of a wounded or dead mounted Parthian officer. Behind them armoured trumpeters signal the counterattack. The next important scene of the composition depicts L. Verus’ chariot (his figures does not survive) charging against the enemy. The battle between the Romans and the Parthians is man-to-man and is depicted contractually in pairs. In front of the chariot is a male figure with chiton and chlamys possibly identified as Mars Propugnator.17 The following slab, which must be possibly placed at the center of the composition, is dominated by the figure of a warrior about to inflict the final blow with his sword to his opponent. He does not wear armour but only a short chiton. The warrior’s classical pose is characteristic for figures of heroes during this era. He could possibly be identified as Virtus18 or a hero fighting with the Romans, for example the Ephesian Androclos. Next to this hero fights a mounted Roman general. Apart from the typical Roman attire he also wears anaxirides, something which may suggest a foreign descent. Stähler believes that it is L. Verus’ general, Avidius Cassius.19 The roman rider which turns his back toward the viewer in the following slab could be identified as the expedition’s second general Statius Priscus). This second-to-last slab is dominated by another heroic figure which refers to classical models. He is preparing to finish off the Parthian kneeling in front of him. This could be a personification of Honour (Honos). The final surviving, but not corner, slab represents two mounted Roman generals leading the war to its end . They could be Martius Verus, successor to the diseased Statius Priscus on the left, and Avidius Cassius on the right. Their similar rendering suggests their equal rank and their equal contribution to the outcome of the war.20 Finally, for the last slab of the frieze of the Parthian war which does not survive, Oberteiner suggests one similar to the first calm scene, with a mounted male facing to the right.21

The composition of the Parthian war summarizes basic elements of the entire duration of the war and does not describe a particular battle. The Roman victory is, of course, obvious: not a single wounded Roman, not a single Roman in a difficult position. The victors are represented in a particularly idealized manner; their clothes and armour are rendered with precision. This contrasts with the baroque rendition of the Parthians who are depicted with assorted garments or in some cases they are barbarically naked. On the frieze of the Parthian war one can discern the intense influences of baroque Hellenistic models and particularly Pergamene representations which represent the struggle between the Greeks and the Gauls.

3.3. Personifications of towns of the Empire

The third thematic cycle of the sculptural decoration is concerned with personifications of important towns of the Empire which participated in the events of the Parthian war.22 The repetitive iconographic pattern used in this frieze consists of the representation of two standing figures on either side of a reclining river deity. Between the heads of the two standing figures is placed the symbol of the town and the wider area. An important position was obviously offered to Rome which was pictured next to the cuirassier L. Verus-Mars, a direct reference to the triumph over the Parthians. The Tiber would be located lower. An important position in the composition, perhaps next to the slab of Rome, was given to Ephesus. The capital of Asia is represented by two Amazons, with short chiton and anaxirides, who according to myth founded the Artemision and the town. Between them was placed a flag with the symbols of Artemis, the crescent moon and the star. According to M. Laubenberger the flag is possibly connected to the successful war in the east, while the face of one of the Amazons has the realistic characteristics of a portrait and is possibly identified with Annia Lucilla, daughter of M. Aurelius and wife of L. Verus.23 It is worth noting that their wedding was possibly conducted in Ephesus in 164 AD and the town cut commemorative coins bearing the portrait of Annia Lucilla. Laubenberger moves on to support that another slab represented the local hero of Ephesus with the characteristics of L. Verus, a fact which would have further elevated the town.24

3.4. The «Apotheosis» of L. Verus

Very important iconographically, but problematic in its interpretation, is the series of representations connected to the composition of the so-called «apotheosis» of L. Verus.25 He was pronounced divus (god) by the senate after his death, in 169 AD, at the proposition of M. Aurelius. Three separate scenes from the Parthian monument have been attributed to this larger composition. The first (which develops over at least two slabs) represents the cuirassier Caesar on Helios’ chariot being driven by Nike (Victory) who leads him by the hand. The movement of the chariot is dashing and appears to be heading for a higher level. In front Virtus personifies the emperor’s bravery. The figure with the radial crown in the background was until recently considered to be Helios, but Oberleitner has lately suggested his identification as Lucifer.26 Below the chariot is represented a female figure with a cornucopia. It is possibly the personification of a place, perhaps Italy or Tellus (=land) or could be identified as Peace who bring s plenty. In such a case, we could also assume that the child figure also carrying fruit is Plutus. The symbolism of the entire scene is obvious: Caesar’s triumph over the Parthians guarantees prosperity and peace for the state.27

The other two scenes which belong to this thematic cycle survive fragmented. In one, which is known as the Artemis-Selene slab, the goddess is depicted on her chariot drawn by deer. Above the chariot are Esperos, the twilight star, and Night suggesting Artemis’ identification with Selene. On the lower level, the Sea is represented on a sea-panther. The other scene represents Apollo-Helios on a slab discovered only in 1989 in the library area.28 It represents Apollo-Helios on a chariot drawn by two griffins. The driving, child figure above the god is identified as Lucifer, the dawn star, or Zephyr. Below the chariot is an unidentified reclining figure. Oberleitner’s suggestion for its identification as Tellus seems quite plausible in correspondence to the Sea in the Artemis scene. Moreover, it is very possible that Eos lead the way in the now lost front part of the representation. The clear similarities between the three scenes and their placement at the entrance to the monument has led Oberleitner to assume that there was a fourth scene depicting Verus’ wife Annia Lucilla,29 possibly with the characteristics of Selene.

The majority of researchers believe that these scenes depict the ascension of the now dead and deified L. Verus to Olympus in the sun’s chariot. Knibbe moreover believes that the Parthian monument is, in fact, a honourary cenotaph by Ephesus to the deceased L. Verus.30 However, as Engemann has rightly pointed out, the depiction of the Caesar as a cuirassier refers directly to his victory over the Parthians and is more closely related to a triumphant representation. Similarly, the presence of Nike (Victory) and of Virtue (Virtus) does not appear to have a precedent in «apotheosis» scenes, while these personifications are regularly found in the representations of victories and triumphant emperors. In other words, he supports that this is not a depiction of the dead L. Verus as divus but the triumphant Caesar as a new Helios, on his chariot in a similar way as the new Zeus-Trajan.31 This interpretation could correspond with the supposed representation of Annia Lucilla on Selene’s chariot in the corresponding scene. Caesar’s wife definitely did not need to be deified officially during her lifetime in order to be depicted as a new Selene and the same is true of L. Verus. On the other hand, the representation of Annia Lucilla in an exceptionally honourary manner on a monument for the divus L. Verus is deemed problematic if one considers that immediately after the death and deification of her husband, Annia Lucilla moved on to a new, socially unacceptable marriage.32

3.5. Meeting of the gods

The fifth and last thematic cycle of narrative representations on the monument represents the meeting of the gods on Olympus.33 It remains under discussion whether a head covered with himation is identified as L. Verus and if its can be connected to this scene.34 If it can, then the Caesar appears to participate as a god in the chorus of the Olympians. This does not necessarily mean – nor can it be dismissed – that this representation was completed after his official deification in Rome. In either case, the composition of the meeting of the gods is based on a repetitive iconographic motif with two standing figures on either side of a seated one.35 Low in the centre is depicted an object characteristic of this religious group. A very good example of this is the slab of the seated Aphrodite between two standing Nymphs. Α river deity and an upturned cup of water are depicted βelow, which suggests the relationship between the goddesses and the water element. Other fragments of the frieze confirm that represented, among others, were Zeus, Athena, Poseidon and Dionysus.

4. Style

In the narrative representations mentioned above one can discern three different styles. The first, in the friezes of the Adoption and part of the Personifications of towns and the Meeting of the gods, echoes the official, Imperial Roman style which is characterized by dry and static vibrancy, flatness and a frequently frontal rendering of the figures. A basic element here is the depiction of the individual characteristics of each figure.

On the contrary, in the frieze of the Parthian war we can observe the style characteristic of Asia Minor monuments and sarcophagi of this era; dashing, dynamic, with figures full of intense movement, risky shortenings, and complicated overlapping. The relief is high and the figures are as a rule idealistic, without however loosing any of their expressiveness. Important is the differentiation between the Romans, depicted generally in an idealized manner, without intense facial expressions and with minimal use of the drill for the hair and beards, and the Parthians, which are characterized by an intensely baroque rendering with lively movements, faces full of passion and the extensive use of the drill for the hair, beards and the irises in their eyes.

Finally, the thematic cycle of the «apotheosis», presents a medial style which combines the principles of both the official and the dynamic style.36

5. Identification – Date

It is now generally accepted in research that the Parthian monument was founded in honour of L. Verus by the town of Ephesus, which accommodated him for a considerable period of time during the Parthian war. Only the Italian scholar P. Liverani37 has suggested the connection of the monument with Antoninus Pius and its erection during his reign, in around 145 AD. Its subject matter however does not support such a dating and interpretation for the monument,38 which has to be connected with L. Verus’ battles in the East.

For a more precise dating of the monument after 166 or in 169 AD, i.e. dates during which L. Verus was either still alive or dead and deified, an interpretation of the scenes of the so-called «apotheosis» is crucial. As mentioned above, Engemann argued convincingly that two basic iconographic elements of the depiction of L. Verus on the chariot, Nike (Victory) and Virtue (Virtus), lead to the conclusion that the Caesar is represented still alive, victorious and triumphant as a new Helios. On the other hand, the same scholarpinpointed the problematic identification of a head covered with himation attributed to the frieze with the meeting of the gods as L. Verus, while he also supported that the presence of the Caesar among the gods did not necessarily mean that he is depicted after his death.39 If these opinions are correct – which seems quite possible – then the monument must have been erected immediately after l. Verus’ victory, in 166 AD and not on occasion of his apotheosis three years later.

This opinion is further strengthened by a new reading of the very important inscription (IvE III 721) by Engemann.40 According to this, the family of the high priest Timeos undertook the collection of money to cover the cost of hunting games organized during celebrations for the Parthian triumph and used the money for the erection/decoration (or purchase of the land) of a monument identified as Caesar’s Nike. The hypothesis of the identification of this building with the Parthian monument appears particularly attractive and, if valid, confirms the opinion that the entire work began in 166 AD in honour, as its name suggests, of «Caesar’s Victory».

6. Early Christian and Byzantine era

During Late Antiquity, and more particularly after Theodosios I’s decree in 391 AD, it seems that the Parthian monument suffered systematic destruction and fragments were used as building material. Many fragments of the relief friezes were incorporated into the basin constructed in front of the library in 400 AD. Others were transferred to the harbour area, to the square between the baths and the Arcadiane. Certain sections of the monument were located near the Octagon and in the Tetragonos Agora.41

7. State of preservation – history of the research

A large part of the reliefs from the Parthian monument was found by Austrian archaeologists in Ephesus from 1897 to 1901.42 During roughly the same period they were moved, with permission obtained from Sultan Abdul Hammed II to Vienna. Some of these were exhibited for the first time in 1905 in the Vienna History of Art Museum; in 1932 they were moved into Prince Eugene’s old stables. After many adventures during World War II and later, most of the relief plaques with the narrative scenes have today been restored and are exhibited in a separate room in the Ephesosmuseum in Vienna. The reliefs which belong to the decorative band are mainly still in Ephesus.

Initially the reliefs were connected to M. Aurelius (161–180 AD) and Commodus (180-192 AD), while already from 1915 A. Strong had suggested the connection between the monument’s iconography and the «apotheosis» of M. Aurelius. The correct interpretation was soon suggested by A. Rumpf and F. v. Lorentz. 43 Despite numerous and important relative articles, a comprehensive study has not yet been published. It is currently being prepared by W. Oberleitner and his colleagues. In 1991, Knibbe suggested the identification of the foundations next to the library with the altar of Artemis which was later converted into a victory monument and cenotaph for L. Verus in 166 or 169 AD. 44 Finally, the most recent and detailed treatise on the monument happened on occasion of an anniversary conference for the 100 years of archaeological research by the Austrian Archaeological Institute in Vienna.45

1. Lucius Verus (L. Verus) was the son of A. Commodus Verus who was intended to be Hadrian’s successor. He lost his father when he was eight in 136 AD. Two years later he was selected by Hadrian as his successor in a co-ruling system with Marcus Aurelius. Both were adopted in 138 by Antoninus Pius, who had previously been adopted by the dying Hadrian and was appointed guardian to the two underage successors. After Antoninus’ death and the smooth transition of power to M. Aurelius, the later proclaimed his adopted brother L. Verus august in 161 AD and a year later he placed him in charge of the Parthian war. Although L. Verus never really visited the front line, he was believed responsible for the campaign’s success in 166 AD in honour of which the Ephesians built the so-called «Parthian monument». About the Parthian war see compendiously SHA, Vita Veri 6,1 ff. L. Verus died three years later and was deified by the senate in 169 AD.

2. Jobst, W., «Zur Standortbestimmung und Rekonstruktion des Parthersiegaltares von Ephesos», ÖJh 56 (1985), p. 79-82.

3. See Oberleitner, W., «Zwei unbekannte Fragmente des Parthermonuments», in Blakolmer, F. – Krierer, K.R. – Krinzinger, F. – Landskron-Dinstl, A. – Szemethy, H.D. – Zhuber-Okrog, K. (ed.), Fremde Zeiten. Festschrift für J. Borchhardt zum sechsigsten Geburtstag am 25. Februar 1996 (Wien 1996). P. 374, note 4.

4. See Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 631.

5. Hueber, F., Ephesos. Gebaute Geschichte (Mainz 1997), p. 90.

6. Dolomitic marble: a type of marble with great conciseness in small compact dolomite crystals, yellowish or grey-white in colour.

7. See Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 630.

8. See Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 630.

9. See Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 630.

10. See Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 631, plate 158.1-2.

11. Jobst, W., «Zur Standortbestimmung und Rekonstruktion des Parthersiegaltares von Ephesos», ÖJh 56 (1985), p. 81-82, fig. 2-3.

12. Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 632.

13. See Oberleitner, W. – Gschwantler, K. – Bernhard-Walcher, A. – Bammer, A., Katalog der Antikensammlungen II. Funde aus Ephesos und Samothrake (Wien 1978), p. 68 ff.,  no. 59-64, fig. 50. Also Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 631, plate 158.1-2.

14. Regarding the reconstruction of the plaques of the Adoption frieze we generally follow the monument’s main researcher Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 623 ff., and by the same author, «Zum Partherdenkmal von Ephesos: Rekonstruktion des Stieropfers», in Steine und Wege. Festschrift für D. Knibbe (SoschrÖAI 32, Wien 1999), p. 113-124. For the portraits of this scene see Laubenberger, M., «Zu den Porträts und Städtepersonifikationen des Parthermonuments», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 647 ff.

15. Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 623.

16. For the composition of the Parthian war see the detailed study by Stähler, K., «Lucius Verus Parthicus Medicus. Zum Partherschlachfries aus Ephesos», Boreas 10 (1987), p. 107 ff. See also Oberleitner, W., in Oberleitner, W. – Gschwantler, K. – Bernhard-Walcher, A. – Bammer, A., Katalog der Antikensammlungen II. Funde aus Ephesos und Samothrake (Wien 1978), p. 70 ff., cat. numb. 65-68, pict. 51 and more recently Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 625 ff. See also Landskron, A., Ehtnikon oder Ethnika auf dem Schlachtfries des «Partherdenkmals» von Ephesos (Wien 2001).

17. Stähler, K., «Lucius Verus Parthicus Medicus. Zum Partherschlachfries aus Ephesos», Boreas 10 (1987), p. 113.

18. Stähler, K., «Lucius Verus Parthicus Medicus. Zum Partherschlachfries aus Ephesos», Boreas 10 (1987), p. 114.

19. Stähler, K., «Lucius Verus Parthicus Medicus. Zum Partherschlachfries aus Ephesos», Boreas 10 (1987), p. 113 ff.

20. For the identification of these figures and the narrative techniques used in the composition of the Parthian war see Stähler, K., «Lucius Verus Parthicus Medicus. Zum Partherschlachfries aus Ephesos», Boreas 10 (1987), p. 113-116.

21. Oberleitner, W., in Oberleitner, W. – Gschwantler, K. – Bernhard-Walcher, A. – Bammer, A., Katalog der Antikensammlungen II. Funde aus Ephesos und Samothrake (Wien 1978), p. 72 ff., no. 69-76, fig. 52. Also see Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 625.

22. Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 625 ff.

23. Laubenberger, M., «Zu den Porträts und Städtepersonifikationen des Parthermonuments», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 651 ff. More generally for the particular scene see also the most recent study by Landskron, A., Zur Vexillumträerin auf dem sog. Partherdenkmal von Ephesos (Wien 2002).

24. Laubenberger, M., «Zu den Porträts und Städtepersonifikationen des Parthermonuments», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 650.

25. For the complete «apotheosis» composition, see Oberleitner, W., «Die Apollon-Heliosplatte des Parthermonuments. Ein Neufund», ÖJh 64 (1995), p. 39 ff. and Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 627 ff. Also see Oberleitner, W. – Gschwantler, K. – Bernhard-Walcher, A. – Bammer, A., Katalog der Antikensammlungen II. Funde aus Ephesos und Samothrake (Wien 1978), p. 89 ff., cat. numb. 82-83, pict. 69-70. Against the interpretation of the scene as an apotheosis see the argumentation by Engemann, J., «Das ‘Apotheosebild’ des Partherdenkmals aus Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 633 ff.

26. Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 628.

27. Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 628.

28. About this plaque see Oberleitner, W., «Die Apollon-Heliosplatte des Parthermonuments. Ein Neufund», ÖJh 64 (1995), p. 39-61.

29. Oberleitner, W., «Die Apollon-Heliosplatte des Parthermonuments. Ein Neufund», ÖJh 64 (1995), p. 60-61. A female head with portrait characteristics found in the Efes Müzesi Selcuk (Ephesus Museum) in 1989 was attributed to this scene. Oberleitner, W., «Zwei unbekannte Fragmente des Parthermonuments», in Blakolmer, F. – Krierer, K.R. – Krinzinger, F. – Landskron-Dinstl, A. – Szemethy, H.D. – Zhuber-Okrog, K. (ed.), Fremde Zeiten. Festschrift für J. Borchhardt zum sechsigsten Geburstag am 25. Februar 1996 (Wien 1996), p. 377 ff. W. Oberleitner believes it is quite possible that the head is identified with L. Verus’ wife herself.

30. Knibbe, D., «Das ‘Parthermonument: (Parthersieg)altar der Artemis (und Kenotaph des L. Verus) an der Triodos», BerMatÖAI (1991), p. 5 ff. See also on the apotheosis of L. Verus, Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 627 ff., as well as Engemann, J., «Das ‘Apotheosebild’ des Partherdenkmals aus Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 634, notes 9-11.

31. Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 635 ff.

32. See Laubenberger, M., «Zu den Porträts und Städtepersonifikationen des Parthermonuments», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 652.

33. Oberleitner, W., in Oberleitner, W. – Gschwantler, K. – Bernhard-Walcher, A. – Bammer, A., Katalog der Antikensammlungen II. Funde aus Ephesos und Samothrake (Wien 1978), p. 75 ff., cat. numb.77-80, pict. 55-56, and by the same author «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 629 ff.

34. Engemann, J., «Das ‘Apotheosebild’ des Partherdenkmals aus Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 635, plate 159.1

35. Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 629.

36. A comprehensive study of the monument’s style has not yet taken place nor have the various artists who worked on it been saught. A small but important reference is made by Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 631. For the frieze of the Parthian war, see the observations by the same author in «Zwei unbekannte Fragmente des Parthermonuments», in Blakolmer, F. – Krierer, K.R. – Krinzinger, F. – Landskron-Dinstl, A. – Szemethy, H.D. – Zhuber-Okrog, K. (ed.), Fremde Zeiten. Festschrift für J. Borchhardt zum sechsigsten Geburstag am 25. Februar 1996 (Wien 1996), p. 375.

37. Liverani, P., «Il considdetto monumento partico di Lucio Ver. Problemi di interpretazione di cronologia», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 639 ff.

38. Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 631.

39. Engemann, J., «Das ‘Apotheosebild’ des Partherdenkmals aus Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 634 ff.

40. Engemann, J., «Eine Victoria Caesaris und das Parthermonument (IvE 721», ZPE 113 (1996), p. 91-93.

41. For the fate of the monument during later years see generally Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 619, as well as Hueber, F., «Zur Städtebaulichen Entwicklung des hellenistisch-römischen Ephesos», 1stMitt 47 (1997), p. 262-263 and 269. Also see by the same author Ephesos. Gebaute Geschichte (Mainz 1997), p. 77 and 90. For the discovery of the other plaques during the excavations of the 19th and 20th century see Oberleitner, W. – Gschwantler, K. – Bernhard-Walcher, A. – Bammer, A., Katalog der Antikensammlungen II. Funde aus Ephesos und Samothrake (Wien 1978), p. 7 ff.

42. Regarding the history of the research on the monument recently see Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 619 ff.

43. Oberleitner, W., «Das Partherdenkmal von Ephesos», in Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 622 with references containing older views on the monument.

44. Knibbe, D., «Das ‘Parthermonument: (Parthersieg)altar der Artemis (und Kenotaph des L. Verus) an der Triodos», BerMatÖAI (1991), p. 5 ff.

45. See Friesinger, H. – Krinzinger, F. (ed.), 100 Jahre österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos. Akten des Symposions, Wien 1995 (Wien 1999), p. 619 ff.
     
 
 
 
 
 

Δελτίο λήμματος
 
press image to open photo library
 

>>>
 
 
 
 
 
 

copyright © 2008, ΙΔΡΥΜΑ ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ

Το έργο Μεγάλη Δικτυακή «Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Ελληνικού Πολιτισμού» - Μέρος Α΄ συγχρηματοδοτήθηκε σε ποσοστό 80% από το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Περιφερειακής Ανάπτυξης (ΕΤΠΑ) και κατά 20% από εθνικούς πόρους στο πλαίσιο του Επιχειρησιακού Προγράμματος "Κοινωνία της Πληροφορίας" του Γ΄ ΚΠΣ.

Το έργο ΕΓΚΥΚΛΟΠΑΙΔΕΙΑ ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ συγχρηματοδοτήθηκε σε ποσοστό 80% από το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Περιφερειακής Ανάπτυξης (ΕΤΠΑ) και κατά 20% από εθνικούς πόρους στο πλαίσιο του Επιχειρησιακού Προγράμματος "Κοινωνία της Πληροφορίας" του Γ΄ ΚΠΣ.