Essays in Classical Archaeology

for

Eleni Hatzivassiliou

1977-2007

edited by

Donna Kurtz

with Caspar Meyer, David Saunders, Athena Tsingarida and Nicole Harris

The Beazley Archive and Archaeopress July 2008

Studies in Classical Archaeology Volume IV

Essays in Classical Archaeology

for

Eleni Hatzivassiliou

1977-2007

© Beazley Archive and authors 2008

ISBN 978-1-903767-05-4

Published by

The Beazley Archive Stelios Ioannou School for Classical and Byzantine Studies, Oxford OX1 3LU, England

www.beazley.ox.ac.uk

in association with

Archaeopress Publishers of British Archaeological Reports

Gordon House, 276 Banbury Road, Oxford OX2 7ED, England www.archaeopress.com

This volume also forms British Archaeological Reports, International Series, No. 1796

239

26

Sosilos’ statue and nudity in public honorific portrait statues

in the Hellenistic period

Stella Skaltsa Our knowledge of the appearance of male public honorific portrait statues in the Hellenistic period is primarily based on Roman copies and late Hellenistic extant marble statues. Hellenistic grave reliefs shed further light onto the range and appearance of statuary types. Original public honorific portrait statues, predominantly made of bronze, have largely disappeared; what remain are the bases on which they once stood. Although statue bases reveal the material (bronze or marble) and the general posture of the statues (e.g. seated, standing, equestrian), they are nonetheless mute as to their actual appearance. This article examines a base of a public honorific portrait statue from Delos that offers some new insights into honorific portrait statues before the late Hellenistic period. I shall argue that appearance may have occasionally been adapted to the context where the statue was set up. Likewise, context would have rendered the image meaningful, ascribing to it specific values. Sosilos’ statue In an article published in 1973 Knoepfler associated the statue base of Sosilos with the naked andrias, a standing statue in the round, recorded in Kallistratos’ inventory (156/155 BC).1 The naked andrias, housed in the gymnasium on Delos, is described as holding a

I would like to thank Professor R.R.R. Smith and Dr J. Ma for their comments and help. My thanks also extend to the editors as well as to Dr Olympia Bobou, Yannis Galanakis and Dimitrios Skrekas for their help, corrections and suggestions. For the ideas expressed here and any shortcomings, I remain solely responsible. 1 Knoepfler, in ÉD, 233-237.

staff,2 while Sosilos’ base was found reused in the synagogue.3 Knoepfler made the association on the basis of the honouring body, namely the Delians. The inscription carved on the statue base records the demos of the Delians as the honouring body.4 In the inventory of Kallistratos a naked andrias is recorded as a dedication by the Delians.5 Yet any further specification about the identity of the honorand is absent both from the statue base and the inventory. A description of the main attributes of the andrias (nudity and staff) suffices to render it recognisable, for they give an individuality, which is further enhanced by the documentation of the honouring body and the place where it was set up (in an exedrion in the gymnasium).6

2 ID 1417 A I, ll. 133-134: Ðνδριάντα τέλειον γυμνÄν Ñν τωι Ñξεδρίωι ñχοντα Rαβδόν, Ðνάθεμα Δηλίων (in the exedrion a life-size naked statue holding a staff, a dedication by the Delians). This andrias is also recorded in ID 1412 A, ll. 18-19 though the inscription is partly preserved. See also Moretti, Inventaires, 140. 3 For the chronological phases of the building see Trümper, M., “The Oldest Original Synagogue in the Diaspora: the Delos Synagogue reconsidered”, Hesperia 37 (2004), 513-598. 4 IG XI 4, 1087: Û δημος Û Δηλίων Σώσιλον Δωριέως (The people of Delos [dedicated the statue of] Sosilos, son of Dorieus). 5 See note 2 above. 6 Moretti has recently suggested that the gymnasium mentioned in the inventory should not be identified with the gymnasium next to the stadium (GD 76), as generally assumed, but rather with the palaestra by the lake (GD 67) (Moretti, Le gymnase, 617-638). He thus suggested that Sosilos’ statue would have been set up in the semicircular exedra on the south side of the palaestra by the lake based on the curved back side of the base (Moretti, Inventaires, 143-144). For earlier views about the various readings of the inventory in relation to the layout of the gymnasium (GD 76) see Moretti, Inventaires, 125 n. 2; more recently Ferruti, F., “Il ginnasio di Delo e l’inventario di Callistrato”, ASAtene 76-78 (1998-2000), 219-234, who follows the earlier views as regards the identification of the gymnasium.

Skaltsa

240

Kallistratos’ inventory, dated to 156/155 BC, comprises an annual list recording the property of the Sanctuary of Apollo. It was compiled by the hieropoioi, the officials in charge of the sanctuary’s upkeep. Among other things, they record the valuables and offerings housed in the gymnasium.7 Their description, though brief, is accurate in that it helps their successors to locate the objects described in the inventory and identify them securely. The earliest offering in the gymnasium recorded in this inventory dates back to the last third of the third century BC.8 In other words, the objects housed in the gymnasium on Delos covered a span of more than two generations when the inventory was compiled. The andrias under discussion must date before 167/166 BC, when the Athenians took over Delos, since the honouring body is the Delians and not the Athenians. Sosilos’ statue base also dates to the period of Independence (314-167 BC) and in particular to the late third century BC based on prosopographic evidence.9 Thus, the andrias and the statue base fall within the same chronological framework. The statue base was reused in a wall in the synagogue, located to the east of the gymnasium (GD 76).10 Three more statue bases, which are clearly associated with the gymnasium, have also been found reused in the synagogue.11 Furthermore, the two graffiti inscribed on the top surface of the base may allude to a gymnasium context,12 because the young men frequenting the gymnasium used to inscribe their names almost everywhere, on walls, benches and statue bases.13 Although the association between the statue base and the andrias of the inventory as proposed by Knoepfler was well received, Sosilos’ identity has been contested. Knoepfler identified him with a 7 ID 1417 A I, ll. 118-154. Three more inventories list the valuables housed in the gymnasium, but they are badly preserved (ID 1412 A, ll. 13-24; 1423 Ba II, ll. 1-8; 1426 B I, ll. 43-50). See also Moretti, Inventaires, 140-141. 8 Dedication by Mantitheos and Aristeas (IG XI 4, 1151 and ID 1417 A I, ll. 130-131). For the date see Vial, Délos indépendante, 240. 9 Sosilos came from a well-known family (Vial, Délos indépendante, 376-378, Stemma XXXVII). 10 Moretti, Inventaires, 151. 11 IG XI 4, 1152 (before 167/166 BC); ID 1923bis (126/125 BC); ID 1928 (early first century BC). See also Moretti, Le gymnase, 628. 12 Both graffiti read Ζήνων (Knoepfler, in ÉD, 234; Jacquemin, Offrandes du gymnase, 156-157, fig. 1-2). 13 E.g. Priene (walls), Delos (benches), Messene (statue bases). For graffiti in gymnasia in general see Langner, M., Antike Graffitizeichnungen. Motive, Gestaltung und Bedeutung. Palilia 11 (Wiesbaden, 2001), 96-98.

paidotribes, namely the instructor in physical exercise, in light of the rhabdos which Sosilos’ andrias held in his hand.14 First Vial, and later others,15 suggested that Sosilos should be identified with a gymnasiarch since the rhabdos can stand as a general attribute of authority,16 and thus should not be limited to the paidotribes. Sosilos’ identity seems to be based chiefly on the semantics of the rhabdos. The rhabdos is a staff of variable length and thickness, normally made of wood, and used in various ways. As a walking stick it can be part of the outfit of a beggar, the old and infirm, a traveller, and a philosopher.17 On Attic grave reliefs male figures dressed in a himation often lean on a staff, which serves as an attribute of their civic role.18 In the gymnasium context the rhabdos is first and foremost associated with the gymnasiarch, the official in charge of good conduct and the upkeep of the gymnasium. The rhabdos served as an attribute of the gymnasiarch’s authority.19 However, it could also be used as an instrument of punishment on young men by other gymnasium officials and instructors as well.20 Sosilos received the highest of honours, a bronze statue, and that renders his identification with a paidotribes more problematic. Instructors, like paidotribes, do not seem to receive a bronze statue, 14 Knoepfler, in ÉD, 236. 15 Vial, Délos indépendante, 241; Gauthier and Hatzopoulos, Loi gymnasiarchique, 66. 16 RE III, s.v. ‘Stag’, 1901-1902. 17 RE III, s.v. ‘Stag’, 1895-1896. For the associations of the rhabdos with leisure and an aristocratic lifestyle in the archaic period see van Wees, H., “Greeks Bearing Arms. The State, the Leisure Class, and the Display of Weapons in Archaic Greece”, in Fisher, N., and van Wees, H. (eds.), Archaic Greece: New Approaches and New Evidence (Swansea, 1998), 333-378, esp. 358-362. 18 CAT 2.181, 2.332, 2.339, 2.350a, 2.379d, 2.398, 2.930, 2.949, 2.950, 3.408a, 3.409, 3.414a, 3.467, 4.384, 4.431, 6.905. 19 When Marc Antony resumed the gymnasiarchy in Athens, he entered the gymnasium dressed in a himation and holding the staffs related to this office. Plut., Ant. 33.7: Ñπà τούτοις εÚστία τοÅς †Eλληνας, Ñγυμνασιάρχει δ΄ Αθηναίοις, καà τÀ της Ùγεμονίας παράσημα καταλιπÆν οóκοι, μετÀ των γυμνασιαρχικων Rάβδων Ñν Úματίz καà φαικασίοις προ›ει, καà διαλαμβάνων τοÅς νεανίσκους Ñτραχήλιζεν. “To celebrate this victory Antony feasted the Greeks, and acted as gymnasiarch for the Athenians. He left at home the insignia of his command, and went forth carrying the wands of a gymnasiarch in a Greek robe and white shoes, and he would take the young combatants by the neck and part them.” (Trans. by Perrin, P., Plutarch Lives, vol. IX [Cambridge Massachusetts - London, 1996, reprinted]). 20 Gauthier and Hatzopoulos, Loi gymnasiarchique, 65-68. SEG 27, 261 B ll. 8-10: τÄν δÁ μ πειθαρχουντα, τÄν μÁν ÜπÄ τÂν Rάβδον μαστιγούτω Û γυμνασίαρχος, τοÅς δÁ ðλλους ζημιούτω. “Whoever does not obey (the leader), the gymnasiarch shall punish him with flogging, [and] he shall fine the others”, trans. by Austin, M.M., The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman Conquest. A Selection of Ancient Sources in Translation (Cambridge, 2006, 2nd edn.), no. 137.

Sosilos’ statue base

241

even in the late Hellenistic period, when the honorific portrait habit increased dramatically.21 It therefore seems more likely that the Delians awarded it to a civic official rather than to an instructor:22 the rhabdos was a visual attribute that pertained to Sosilos’ authority and civic role. If we accept Knoepfler’s identification of the andrias mentioned in Kallistratos’ inventory with Sosilos’ statue base, and that the most likely role of Sosilos was that of a gymnasiarch, I would like to re-examine this statue in relation to the honorific portrait habit as attested on Delos in the second half of the third century BC and the early second century BC. Public honorific portrait statues on Delos At least twelve honorific statues set up by the Delian demos,23 including that of Sosilos, are known from this period from inscribed statue bases. Two supported the statues of Hellenistic rulers (second half of the third century and first third of the second century BC).24 However, according to the inventories more rulers received honorific statues, the bases of which do not survive.25 Of the remaining statue bases, four carried the statues of foreigners whereas six carried those of Delians. The identity of the honorands is clear in a few cases. A doctor from Kos received the greatest of honours (a bronze statue), perhaps due to his professional and possible diplomatic services to Delos,26 while another 21 A drill-master (hoplomachos) of Laodikeia was praised with a laurel wreath and the stele of the decree (set up in the sanctuary of Apollo and not in the gymnasium) by the Athenian demos on Delos in the period of the Second Athenian Occupation, yet he did not receive a bronze statue (ID 1501). See also Roussel, P., Délos colonie athénienne. BEFAR vol. 111 (Paris, 1987 reprinted), 194. In the period of the Second Athenian Occupation two paidotribes may have been honoured with bronze statues by the ephebes but not by the demos (ID 1924; 1948). 22 Vial, Délos indépendante, 241. Jacquemin had also questioned Knoepfler’s identification, suggesting that Sosilos: “s’est peut-être egalement occupé de l’installation du gymnase” (Jacquemin, Offrandes du gymnase, 157). 23 IG XI 4, 1075-1076, 1078-1087. I do not include any fragmentary inscription. 24 There are two preserved statue bases, the honorific inscription of which explicitly states the Delian demos as the dedicator; one carried the statue of Ptolemy III Euergetes (246 BC) and is located in front of the temple of Apollo (IG XI 4, 1073; Kotsidu, ΤΙΜΗ ΚΑΙ ΔΟΞΑ, no. 136), the other carried the statue of Laodike, Perseus’ wife (178 BC) (the location of the statue is unknown) (IG XI 4, 1074; ID 443 Ab l. 44; Baslez and Vial, Diplomatie de Délos, 292; Kotsidu, ΤΙΜΗ ΚΑΙ ΔΟΞΑ, no. 130). 25 Reimbursements for the erection of the statues of Attalos I, Antiochos III and his wife, Laodike are recorded in ID 399 A ll, 36-38, 47-49. See also Baslez and Vial, Diplomatie de Délos, 282, 288-289, 291-292. 26 IG XI 4, 1078; ID 399 A ll. 37-38 (reimbursement for the erection of the statue); Durrbach, Choix, no. 61 (Philippos, doctor,

honorand, Admetos of Macedon, a proxenos on Delos, was granted various honours, including two bronze statues.27 Of the honorific statues of Delians, four comprise a familial portrait group that stood on a semicircular exedra in the north Agora.28 The demos honoured with a statue those who would have been actively engaged in public life, though the specific circumstances are unknown. All honorific inscriptions follow the common dedicatory formula: the honorific body in the nominative case and the name of the honorand in the accusative, followed by the patronymic. Only four are more descriptive in that they provide the reasons for the dedication; piety (eusebeia) to the sanctuary, and excellence (arete), generosity (philotimia) or goodwill (eunoia) towards the demos. Honorific titles, like euergetes, are absent. They were all set up in public spaces (with the exception of Sosilos’ statue base), two in the area of the Propylaia,29 another two in the Prytaneion,30 and one each in the North Agora,31 the Agora of Theophrastos,32 the shrine of Zeus Polieus33 and the theatre.34 In other words, the locations chosen were closely associated with the public, administrative, religious, social and cultural life of Delos. All these honorific statues were probably made of bronze.35 Nothing is known about their appearance, except that they were standing. The inventory of Kallistratos is the best source of information regarding the appearance. The statuary type of Sosilos has passed unnoticed, yet it provides significant insights into the appearance of contemporary public honorific statues. The appearance of Sosilos’ statue According to the inventory the andrias, identified with Sosilos’ statue, was a life-size, naked man from Kos). About the inscription and Philippos, see Massar, N., Soigner et servir. Histoire sociale et culturelle de la médecine grecque à l'époque hellénistique, Culture et Cité, vol. 2 (Paris, 2005), 128-129, 143-144, 159, 161. 27 IG XI 4, 1076 (Admetos of Macedon); IG XI 4, 664; 665; 1053; Durrbach, Choix, no. 49. 28 IG XI 4, 1080-1083 (family members, Delians). 29 IG XI 4, 1078; 1086 (Soteles of Delos). 30 IG XI 4, 1084 (Kallidikos of Delos); 1085 (unknown Delian, son of Sosilos). It is unclear whether the latter belonged to the family of Sosilos, son of Dorieus, since the name Sosilos is frequently attested in the prosopography of Delos. 31 IG XI 4, 1080-1083 (semicircular exedra). 32 IG XI 4, 1075 (Nikolaos of Aitolia). 33 IG XI 4, 1076. 34 IG XI 4, 1079 (Satyros of Samos). 35 The statue of Admetos was surely of bronze for this is stated in the decrees. Sosilos’ statue was likewise of bronze as the feet cuttings on the top of the base reveal.

Skaltsa

242

holding a staff. The base confirms the standing pose of Sosilos; both feet were flat on the marble base, which is curved at the back (H. 39 x W. 101.8 x Th. 39.7 cm [53 cm in the centre]) (fig. 1).36 The distinction between the loose and the weight-bearing leg would have been minimal. Nudity and possible significance have received little notice by scholars, who were more interested in explaining Sosilos’ office and the reasons for his honours. Vial, who identified Sosilos with a gymnasiarch, did not pay attention to the statuary type, while Knoepfler, who identified him with a paidotribes, seemed perplexed by Sosilos’ nudity. He followed Jüthner’s explanation that the himation worn by the paidotribes on red-figure vases served practical purposes, that is protection from the sun.37 In this respect, a paidotribes could have been depicted naked (see also the Louvre relief below). The hieropoioi explicitly describe the andrias as nude, gymnos. Gymnos can occasionally mean someone who is ‘lightly clad’, stripped of his armour or wearing a chiton only, or someone who took off his himation.38 A bureaucratic inventory would not use metaphors, infused perhaps by literary exaggerations, to list objects because they needed to be identifiable to the future officials. Apparently our andrias would have been nude, in contrast to most statue(tte)s, housed in the gymnasium and simply described as andriantes, probably depicted dressed.39 The nudity of Sosilos’ statue might suggest an athlete. However, if his statue had been set up in commemoration of a victory at an athletic contest, his victory would have been recorded in the honorific inscription carved on the statue base. This is usually the case; or at least, his name would have been in the 36 Moretti has recently noticed that the surface next to the left foot of the statue, reaching the back and left edges of the base and stopping at a distance before the front edge (31 x 37 cm), has been roughly worked out with a pick in contrast to the polished top surface. He suggested that an outcrop would have originally stood next to the statue, supporting perhaps the rhabdos (Moretti, Inventaires, 151, 152, fig. 16). However, the rhabdos, if long enough, does not need a support. What originally stood next to the statue may have been an iconographic device, for example a small herm, adding perhaps a narrative to the reading of the image (see below the relief in the Louvre). 37 Knoepfler, in ÉD, 236 note 17. 38 Hallett, Roman Nude, 61 note 1 with reference to ancient sources. 39 One more life-size, naked andrias was housed in the gymnasium according to Kallistratos’ inventory (ID 1417 A I, l. 123), but nothing is recorded as regards the honouring body or possible attributes apart from its nudity. A graffito of a naked male figure is incised in one of the benches found in the gymnasium (GD 76) (Couilloud, Graffites, 111 no. 9, 124, fig. 71.1). Couilloud suggested that one of these two naked statues, housed in the gymnasium, might have inspired the drawing of this graffito (Couilloud, Graffites, 128).

nominative case, without any reference to the honouring body. Yet the formula of the inscription falls neatly within the standard formula of public honorific portrait statues. In sculpture nudity is a ‘costume’ with specific connotations.40 Employed for statues of gods, heroes and athletes, nudity has often been considered an expression of elevated ‘heroic’ status, physical prowess and youthful beauty, reflecting idealised tendencies in classical sculpture. Naked portrait statues are dressed in two costumes: in the ‘heroic’ or ‘athletic’. Both can wear a cloak or a chlamys draped over the shoulder or occasionally around the hips. What distinguishes them are attributes – elements of armour in the ‘heroic’ and athletic equipment in the ‘athletic’.41 The chlamys or cloak characterises them as men of action, while nudity lends ‘an agonal colouring’ to the images.42 The ‘heroic costume’ in Hellenistic sculpture seems to have been employed almost exclusively for statues of kings and for tomb portraits,43 where nudity expresses youthful beauty (tomb portraits), agonal values and military virtues (Hellenistic kings). How, then, can the statue of Sosilos, a public honorific portrait statue, be understood? Does his appearance conform to the extant statuary types? Sosilos is naked, in striking contrast to the statuary type par excellence of the good citizen in the guise of an intellectual, in use from the fourth century BC.44 Nor does his appearance fit an ‘heroic’ or ‘athletic’ type. The presence or absence of a chlamys or cloak draped on his shoulder is open to discussion, but he held a rhabdos, an attribute alluding to his civic role as shown above, not a weapon nor any athletic equipment. Sosilos’ statue has no parallels in Hellenistic grave reliefs, where young men are occasionally shown as soldiers or hunters in the ‘heroic costume’45 or as athletes.46 It seems that naked figures holding a rhabdos are absent, whereas 40 Himmelmann, N., Herrscher und Athlet. Die Bronzen vom Quirinal (Bonn, 1989), esp. 116-123; Himmelmann, N., Ideale Nacktheit in der griechischen Kunst. JdI-EH vol. 26 (Berlin, 1990). Bonfante, L., “Nudity as a Costume in Classical Art”, AJA 93 (1989), 543-570 mainly discusses the origins of nudity. 41 Hallett, C.H., “Statues. 5. Naked Statues”, in Smith, R.R.R., Roman Portrait Statuary from Aphrodisias. Aphrodisias II (Mainz am Rhein, 2006), 131-136. 42 Hallett, Roman Nude, 15. 43 Ibid., 26-60. 44 Zanker, P., The Mask of Socrates. The Image of the Intellectual in Antiquity (trans. by A. Shapiro) (Berkeley - Los Angeles - Oxford, 1995). 45 In Hellenistic East Greek grave reliefs: Pfuhl and Möbius, Ostgriechischen Grabreliefs, nos. 286-287, 1439-1443, 1460-1461, 1467, 1477. 46 In Hellenistic East Greek grave reliefs: Pfuhl and Möbius, Ostgriechischen Grabreliefs, nos. 91, 98, 107, 120-121, 124-125, 127, 138, 146-147.

Sosilos’ statue base

243

there are many bearded men dressed in a himation and leaning on a stick.47 What kind of messages would have Sosilos’ nudity conveyed to contemporary viewers? Sosilos’ statue apparently did not exemplify the virtues of a good citizen, like restraint and respectability, as conveyed by the himation type.48 Nor does the honorific inscription carved on the statue base reveal the virtues for which Sosilos was praised. His image would have not borne any connotations to the role of Sosilos as an orator in the Delian assembly.49 The nudity can become meaningful when placed in context. The statue, set up in the gymnasium, would have embodied the values associated with this institution. The gymnasium culture is indissolubly connected with nudity, and as Hallett has recently pointed out: “nudity is the ‘school uniform’ of the Greek gymnasium”.50 Two vital components of gymnasium life, physical exercise and bathing, involved nudity. Sosilos’ statue would have exemplified physical prowess and bodily vigour, appropriate to the gymnasium setting. The rhabdos, on the other hand, an attribute of authority, would have counterbalanced the connotations of nudity, for it might have stood as a reminder of Sosilos’ civic role. The Louvre relief The only parallel to Sosilos’ statue (naked without any chlamys or cloak draped on his shoulder), to my knowledge, is a relief originally from Athens, now in the Louvre (MA 833), that dates perhaps to the mid- first century AD (H. 24 x W. 29.5 x Th. 10 cm) (fig. 2).51 It is broken off at the left side and at the bottom. The figure which is of particular interest to us is on the right – a naked male, standing firmly on his feet, as shown by the rather slightly bent right leg. He holds an upright staff in his left hand, and rests his right upon a herm. The affinities with Sosilos’ statue are clear; both are depicted naked, and hold a staff. What makes a connection between them more explicit is the setting, which in both cases is the 47 See above note 18. 48 On the connotations of the body format of portrait statues, see Dillon, Greek Portrait Sculpture, 106. 49 Despite the fact that Sosilos, the individual under discussion here, proposed a decree: IG XI 4, 748. 50 Hallett, Roman Nude, 21. 51 Winters, Louvre Relief, 381-384. The original composition probably consisted of five figures (Winters, Louvre Relief, 383). The iconography of the relief, its shape (originally it would have been elongated) together with the inscription is reminiscent of the kosmetes’ stelai from Athens: Kaltsas, N., Sculpture in the National Archaeological Museum, Athens (Los Angeles, 2002), nos. 709-711.

gymnasium. The herm to the right of the figure alludes to a gymnasium setting. Furthermore, the figure to the left of the relief holds a palm branch, the symbol of victory. An inscription in the top right reads paidotribes. Winters associated the label of the paidotribes with the naked figure holding the staff, acknowledging at the same time the absence of any comparanda for naked paidotribes.52 This relief helps us to visualise the statuary type of Sosilos, while at the same time framing the setting where this statuary type mostly, if not exclusively, appears, the gymnasium. It does not necessarily help us ascribe to Sosilos a specific identity, but it makes clear that the portrayal of a nude instructor or a gymnasium official might have been appropriate in the gymnasium context. Conclusion The argument presented here depends on the association of the andrias mentioned in Kallistratos’ inventory with the statue base of Sosilos. If we accept this association, then Sosilos’ statue, doomed to oblivion due to the loss of the bronze original, obtains a tangible form: a nude statue holding a staff. Any attempt to define the precise role of Sosilos (whether a gymnasiarch or paidotribes) would make little difference as to the significance of having a nude honorific portrait of an individual other than a king. It should be stressed, however, that the historical context appears to favour the identification of Sosilos with a gymnasiarch to that of a paidotribes. The statue was dedicated by the Delian demos in the late third century BC, in a period when the most prestigious of honours, a bronze statue, was still being sparingly awarded. What is extraordinary is not the grant of a bronze statue to a gymnasium official,53 but his representation (naked). In light of the gymnasium setting this nudity can become meaningful even for statues of officials. Sosilos’ statue shows that experimentation and innovation may have characterised the modes of representation employed in Hellenistic honorific portrait statues.

52 Winters, Louvre Relief, 383-384. 53 In the late third century BC the neoi (young men between 20-30 year old) set up statues in honour of their gymnasiarchs at Kolophon (Gauthier, Ph., “Un gymnasiarche honoré à Colophon”, Chiron 35 [2005], 101-111) and Eresos on Lesbos (IG XII Suppl., 122).

Skaltsa

244

The range of public honorific portrait statues should perhaps be expanded on the basis of the present evidence to accommodate statuary types other than the himation type, associated with the good citizen represented as an intellectual. As it may have been appropriate in particular contexts to present a general

with his military uniform,54 it may have equally been appropriate, though perhaps only rarely, to represent gymnasium officials naked in their own physical and social setting: the gymnasium, where agonal nudity was the norm.

54 For example three statues on Daochos’ monument in Delphi are dressed in military cloak. For the statues of fourth-century Athenian generals see Dillon, Greek Portrait Sculpture, 107-109. See also the review by John Ma in BMCR 2008.02.07: Katsikoudes, N., Δωδώνη. Οι τιμητικοί ανδριάντες. Εταιρεία Ηπειρωτικών Μελετών. Ίδρυμα Ιονίου και Αδριατικού Χώρου vol. 14 (Ioannina, 2006). There is sufficient evidence to suggest that some public honorific portraits in Dodone were dressed with cuirass and armour, a ‘uniform’ normally associated with Hellenistic kings.

Sosilos’ statue base

245

Abbreviations

Baslez and Vial, Diplomatie de Délos

Baslez, M.-Fr., and Vial, Cl., “La diplomatie de Délos dans le premier tiers du IIe siècle”, BCH 111 (1987), 281-312.

BMCR The Bryn Mawr Classical Review. http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/

CAT Clairmont, C.W., Classical Attic Tombstones (Kilchberg, 1993-1995).

Couilloud, Graffites Couilloud, M.-Th., “Appendice III. Les graffites du gymnase”, in Audiat, J., Le Gymnase. EAD 28 (Paris, 1970), 95-137.

Dillon, Greek Portrait Sculpture Dillon, S., Ancient Greek Portrait Sculpture. Contexts, Subjects, and Style (Cambridge, 2006).

Durrbach, Choix Durrbach, F., Choix d’inscriptions de Délos. Textes historiques avec traduction et commentaire (Paris, 1921).

Gauthier and Hatzopoulos, Loi gymnasiarchique Gauthier, Ph., and Hatzopoulos, M.V., La loi gymnasiarchique de Beroia. Meletemata 16 (Athens, 1993).

GD Bruneau, Ph., and Ducat, J., Guide de Délos (Athens, 2005, 4th edn.).

Hallett, Roman Nude Hallett, C.H., The Roman Nude. Heroic Portrait Statuary 200 BC-AD 300 (Oxford, 2005).

ID Inscriptiones Deli.

IG

Inscriptiones Graecae. Jacquemin, Offrandes du gymnase

Jacquemin, A., “Notes sur quelques offrandes du gymnase de Délos”, BCH 105 (1981), 155-169.

Knoepfler, in ÉD Knoepfler, D., “Le base de Sôsilos à la synagogue de Délos”, in Études Déliennes. BCH Suppl. 1 (Athens, 1973), 233-237.

Kotsidu, ΤΙΜΗ ΚΑΙ ΔΟΞΑ Kotsidu, H., ΤΙΜΗ ΚΑΙ ΔΟΞΑ. Ehrungen für hellenistische Herrscher im griechischen Mutterland und in Kleinasien unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der archäologischen Denkmäler (Berlin, 2000).

Moretti, Le gymnase Moretti, J.-Ch., “Le gymnase de Délos”, BCH 120 (1996), 617-638.

Moretti, Inventaires Moretti, J.-Ch., “Les inventaires du gymnase de Délos”, BCH 121 (1997), 125-152.

Pfuhl and Möbius, Ostgriechischen Grabreliefs Pfuhl, E., and Möbius, H., Die ostgriechischen Grabreliefs I-II, 2 vols. (Mainz am Rhein, 1977-1979).

RE Paulys Real Encyclopädie.

SEG Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum.

Vial, Délos indépendante Vial, Cl., Délos indépendante. BCH Suppl. 10 (Athens, 1984).

Winters, Louvre Relief Winters, T.F., “An Inscribed Relief in the Louvre”, Hesperia 61 (1992), 381-384.

Sosilos’ statue base

247

Fig. 1. Statue base of Sosilos. After Jacquemin, Offrandes du gymnase. Courtesy of École Française d’Athènes, Inv. No. E 778.

Fig. 2. Marble relief depicting a naked male figure holding a staff to the right. After Winters, Louvre Relief, Pl. 86. Louvre MA 833.

Courtesy of the Louvre and of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens.