Cat. 6 Portrait Head of Emperor Hadrian

The image of the emperor was omnipresent in Roman society. It appeared in a variety of formats and sizes, although it is known today primarily through portraits sculpted in the round, relief carvings produced for monumental public buildings, and coins.1 Imperial portraits served diverse purposes in a range of civic, religious, domestic, and funerary contexts, thus making them an important part of the visual landscape.2 The portrait head functioned as the embodiment of the emperor’s presence and was therefore expected to convey a powerful likeness that was clearly recognizable by viewers throughout the empire, not only during his lifetime but also after his death, following his apotheosis and subsequent veneration in the imperial cult.3

This over-life-size portrait, which is made of Carrara marble, depicts the emperor Publius Aelius Hadrianus Afer, more commonly known as Hadrian (A.D. 76–138; r. A.D. 117–38).4 Born in Rome to a senatorial family from Hispania, Hadrian was the second emperor with Spanish roots, after his predecessor Trajan (r. A.D. 98–117), from whom he inherited the empire at its greatest extent. Rather than following Trajan’s expansionist policies, Hadrian worked to stabilize the strained empire by pulling back borders in some places and reforming the economic, legal, and military systems.5

During the course of his nearly twenty-one-year reign, Hadrian traveled the empire widely, spending a considerable portion of his time visiting the provinces in order to oversee his reforms. His reign was also marked by an emphasis on building, not only in Rome but also in the provinces, where civic and religious structures were restored or built anew and engineering and infrastructure projects—including roads and water supplies—were undertaken.6 These building projects were intended not only to spread prosperity and the benefits of Roman civilization throughout the empire, but also to forge a sense of cultural unity across the numerous provinces.7 A noted philhellene, Hadrian was particularly fond of Greece and encouraged the architectural revitalization of Athens, which became under his rule the new spiritual center of the empire as well as the headquarters of the Panhellenion, a league of Greek city-states.8

In A.D. 100, prior to his ascent to power, Hadrian married Trajan’s great-niece Sabina (A.D. 83/86–136/137), which in effect positioned him as the emperor’s successor. The marriage was childless and was characterized by later authors as unhappy.9 Hadrian treated Sabina with respect, however, and had her deified by the Senate following her death.10 The emperor is known to have favored the company of a young Bithynian man named Antinous, who drowned in the Nile River in A.D. 130.11

Lacking an heir, the emperor ultimately adopted T. Aurelius Fulvius Boionius Arrius Antoninus, better known as Antoninus Pius, making him his successor. Following Hadrian’s death, Antoninus Pius (r. A.D. 138–61) obtained the Senate’s approval to grant the deceased emperor divine honors, which ensured his predecessor’s deification and continued veneration through the imperial cult, and also secured the legitimacy of his own accession.12

In this marble portrait, certain features have lost their crisp appearance due to a combination of minor damage and an acid cleaning, yet Hadrian is easily recognizable by his hairstyle, beard, and physiognomy.13 His characteristic coiffure of thick curls was made lifelike through the use of a drill in the front and on the sides to create volume and delineate individual locks. Over the forehead is an arc of rounded, upward-pointing curls that have been undercut so sharply that they stand out from the forehead below (fig. 6.1). On the back of the head, the locks are somewhat flatter, although many of the individual strands are clearly articulated, suggesting a high degree of attention on the part of the sculptor (fig. 6.2).

The distinctive cropped beard and moustache are formed by short, lightly carved tufts of hair interspersed with delicate, individual strands (fig. 6.3). Unlike the highly animated hairstyle, the beard is so subtly carved that it hardly augments the contours of the face. Both the hair and the beard reflect the sensitive hand of a highly skilled sculptor who was experienced in creating a naturalistic representation.14

The rich textures of the hair and beard contrast with the smooth, unwrinkled appearance of the emperor’s broad face. Subtle signs of age are evident in the cheeks, which are somewhat more slender than those in other portraits, and in the nasolabial folds that flank the narrow lips.

Another of Hadrian’s distinguishing traits is his narrow, almond-shaped eyes, which gaze toward his left. The eyes were enlivened through the drilling of the pupils and the incising of the irises, stylistic features that were introduced into portraiture during his reign, likely around A.D. 130.15 The detailed carving in the eyes and the eyebrows was largely obliterated by the acid cleaning.16 An additional element recurrent in images of Hadrian is the diagonal crease in each of his earlobes (fig. 6.4).17 Below the head are the remains of the neck, which suggests that the portrait was originally part of a full-length statue or a freestanding bust.

Imperial Portrait Typologies

The concept of the portrait type has long been the organizing principle of the study of representations of the emperor and his family.18 Following this methodology, extant images of an imperial personage are divided into groups that are thought to reflect a common prototype, examples of which share particular characteristics associated with the individual’s iconography, such as the arrangement of the locks of hair or specific facial features.19 These prototypes are generally believed to have been created in recognition of major events in the emperor’s life.20 They were presumably designed in Rome within the imperial circle, although it has been suggested that some were developed by competing workshops.21 The distribution of models may have been centrally controlled by the imperial bureaucracy, or models might have circulated from workshop to workshop through the private art trade.22

In establishing the typology of an emperor’s portraits, modern scholars have traditionally focused on the hairstyle, particularly with regard to the arrangement of the front locks.23 Such details might have been easier for sculptors to replicate than the finer aspects of an individual’s physiognomy, which, if rendered incorrectly, might have hindered recognizability.24 Facial features are considered when identifying a portrait type, although sometimes to a lesser extent.25

Examples of a given type are rarely identical to one another and are often understood to deviate to varying degrees from a now-missing prototype. Variations can be attributed to numerous factors, including local or regional tastes, the patron’s aesthetic goals for the work, and the sculptor’s technical prowess and familiarity with the emperor’s portrait types.26 It is generally accepted that portraits produced in Rome typically adhere more closely to the prototype than do those made in the provinces, where artists seem to have had greater flexibility.27 Certainly the ancient viewer paid less attention than the modern scholar does to the precise arrangement of the hairstyle or the rendering of the facial features on a given portrait.28 What mattered was that the emperor’s official likeness should be immediately identifiable.29

The Vatican Busti 283 Type

Among the Roman emperors, only Augustus (r. 27 B.C.–A.D. 14) is represented in more surviving portraits than Hadrian, who is depicted in approximately 160 examples of sculpted portraits found to date.30 Hadrian’s likeness appears so frequently not only due to his long reign but also because of his extensive travels throughout the empire, during the course of which cities erected statues in honor of his visits.31

The typology of Hadrian’s portraiture was established in 1956 by Max Wegner, who identified six types representing the emperor, each of which is named after either the findspot or the location of the best-preserved example. To this list, two more types have since been added.32 The Art Institute’s portrait of Hadrian has been classified as an example of Wegner’s sixth type, the Typus Paludamentumbüste Vatikan Busti 283, the name piece for which is found in the Sala dei Busti of the Museo Pio Clementino in the Musei Vaticani, Rome (fig. 6.5).33 For the sake of brevity, this type will be referred to henceforth as the Vatican Busti 283 type.

The Chicago Hadrian is one of eight known portraits associated with the Vatican Busti 283 type. In addition to the name piece in Rome, examples in Copenhagen, Erbach (Germany), Naples, and Paris have traditionally been identified as canonical examples of the type, to the ranks of which the Chicago head has been added. The examples in Liverpool and Chania (Crete) have been less confidently assigned to the type, in part due to restorations carried out on the former and stylistic variations in the latter.34 While the majority of these examples are either cleaned or reworked to varying degrees, any changes that resulted from such interventions do not appear to have significantly affected the features that are used in the identification of the type.35

Nearly all of these examples are believed to have originated in Italy, if not in Rome itself. While it is not known where the Chicago and Liverpool portraits were discovered, the portrait from Chania is the only one to have been found in the Greek East. Two of the examples, those in Erbach and Rome, are specifically associated with Hadrian’s Villa at Tivoli, suggesting that the prototype might have been created by a sculptor who was connected to the imperial court.36

Hairstyle

Following the approach usually taken in establishing the typology of imperial portraits, the Vatican Busti 283 type was identified primarily on the basis of the distinct representation of Hadrian’s hairstyle. The coiffure of this type diverges from that of the emperor’s other portrait types in its voluminous appearance, its high degree of plasticity, and the detailed carving of the individual locks. In particular, the tight curls over the forehead are drilled at the interior, lightening what would otherwise be a dense mass of hair while also creating contrasting shadows.37 Based on the plasticity of the hairstyle, Wegner argued that the prototype was a work in bronze rather than in marble, although this claim is not supported by archaeological evidence.38

The hair index of the Vatican Busti 283 type was mapped out by Cécile Evers, who identified approximately a dozen strands of different forms over the forehead, which are oriented in specific directions (fig. 6.6).39 According to Evers, the main variations among the different examples occur in the locks behind the ears and in the bottom row of curls at the back of the head.40 Such features may have been less visible to the ancient viewer, depending on the display context.

The hairstyle of the Chicago portrait is strikingly similar to the examples in Copenhagen, Erbach, Naples, Paris, and Rome in terms of the placement and rendering of the locks in the front and at the sides. The locks behind the ears are most similar to those of the portrait in Naples, as can be seen in a comparison of the right profile views (fig. 6.7). In both works, there are several nearly horizontal locks immediately behind the lower half of the ear, above which are small, tightly wound curls pointing toward the back of the head and a larger, drilled curl with an upward-pointing tip, which is connected to the top of the ear. Such distinct iconographic similarities could indicate that the two sculptures were made in the same workshop.41

Beard

Hadrian’s beard was an equally important part of his image. It is generally accepted that Hadrian was the first emperor to consistently wear a full beard in his portraiture from the time of his accession onward, thereby distinguishing his likeness from the clean-shaven imperial visages prevalent since the reign of Augustus.42 The Roman tradition of shaving one’s facial hair seems to have begun as early as 300 B.C., thus making the beardless face a clear sign of Roman male identity.43 Yet, despite this apparent break with tradition, Hadrian’s choice established a new standard for imperial representation: the wearing of the beard was taken up by the majority of his successors until the emperor Constantine (r. A.D. 306–37), who returned to an unbearded appearance (see fig. 6.8).44 This fashion was also embraced by private individuals, whose likenesses similarly incorporated beards for roughly the next two centuries.45

Beards had long been worn by specific groups and in specific circumstances. They were commonly worn by men on military campaign, as attested on Roman monumental reliefs, such as those on the Column of Trajan in Rome and on the Arch of Trajan at Beneventum, Italy.46 The look was also favored both by members of the lower classes and by younger, fashionable men.47 More generally, young men are thought to have worn the beard until they officially reached adulthood, when it was ritually shaven off as a sign of maturity and dedicated to the gods.48 It might also be worn as a sign of mourning.49

Why Hadrian wore a beard is not known for certain, but a number of theories have been proposed. On a practical level, it may have served to cover blemishes or scars.50 More frequently, it has been argued that the beard was an overt sign of his philhellenism.51 Nicknamed “Graeculus” (“the Greekling”), Hadrian had a passion for Greek culture, literature, and philosophy that has often been thought by modern scholars to explain his motivation for continuing to wear facial hair after becoming emperor.52 Indeed, the beard had long been viewed in the Roman world as “the mark of the Hellene.”53 Greek intellectuals and philosophers were often depicted with long facial hair, groomed to varying degrees (see fig. 6.9).54 It has been suggested that Hadrian’s beard might have been inspired in part by the words of the Greek philosopher Epictetus, who advised that facial hair was intended by nature to help distinguish men from women.55 However, Hadrian’s cropped beard did not resemble the long beard associated with Greek intellectuals. Contemporary Greek adult males of Hadrian’s time also often wore beards—neatly trimmed—and another possibility is that Hadrian’s beard reflected this “cultivated” Greek fashion.56 Hadrian’s beard is indeed typically characterized by a neat and trim appearance, and in the examples of the Vatican Busti 283 type it is especially light and closely cropped.57

In recent years, the “Greekness” of Hadrian’s beard has been challenged. As noted above, in the Roman context beards could also carry military connotations. It has thus been proposed that the beard might have been part of a conscious political strategy concerning Rome’s relationship with the contemporary Greek world.58 Given the increasing importance of the Greek-speaking provinces, it was critical to demonstrate Rome’s ability to protect them and to maintain control over the empire, particularly in light of the Jewish revolt that had occurred in Cyrene in A.D. 115 and spread the following year to Alexandria and Cyprus, which resulted in thousands of deaths and considerable destruction of property.59 Consequently, the beard might be more appropriately read as the “mark of a military man of the younger generation,” especially on a portrait combined with a cuirassed body.60 Further, it has been suggested that Hadrian’s beard and overall appearance were intended to distinguish his likeness from that of Trajan, perhaps in order to reflect his renunciation of his predecessor’s expansionist policies.61

As this scholarly debate implies, it is likely that the beard had no single message. Rather, its reception would have depended on the cultural perspective of any given viewer and the context in which a portrait was displayed; the beard might simultaneously convey both Hellenic cultural associations and Roman political concepts.62 A multivalent and novel feature for a standard imperial image, Hadrian’s beard is a defining characteristic of the emperor’s portrait typology.

Facial Features

To a lesser extent, physiognomic similarities among the portraits of Hadrian have also supported the idea that they are all based on a common sculptural model. In particular, scholars have noted the leftward orientation of the eyes, indicated by the incising of the irises and the drilling of the pupils, the latter of which are rendered as diagonally oriented crescents.63 The leaner face, with its more visible bone structure and subtle nasolabial folds, is also cited as a characteristic of this type.64 A comparison of the Chicago portrait with the example in Copenhagen clearly demonstrates the repetition of these features (fig. 6.10).

Dating

Following Wegner’s suggestion, it is generally believed that this portrait type was developed late in Hadrian’s reign.65 More specifically, it might have been created sometime after his return to Rome in A.D. 132, or perhaps even in A.D. 137 in celebration of his vicennalia, which occurred the year before his death.66 This interpretation is based in large part on a stylistic reading of the technique used to render the hairstyle. The deep carving and drilling, which creates an interplay between light and dark in the individual locks, seems to foreshadow the richly carved men’s coiffures of the Antonine period, as seen in the portraiture of Hadrian’s successor, the emperor Antoninus Pius (see fig. 6.11).67

Hadrian’s facial features in examples of this type are thought to be suggestive of his advanced age.68 Some scholars have read the more slender face and pronounced cheekbones as signs of a loss of physical vitality, and the eyes, which gaze distantly to the left, as evoking a disheartened and melancholic attitude.69 A late date might also be reinforced by the drilling of the eyes in a number of the examples, given that innovation around A.D. 130.70 Yet elsewhere the type has been described as representing a “calm, powerful, intelligent Hadrian.”71 As the interpretation of Hadrian’s physiognomy is highly subjective, attempts to assign a date to the sculptural prototype on these grounds ought to be met with some skepticism.72 However, the small number of portraits of this type may support a late date; if the prototype was produced shortly before Hadrian’s death, its copies might not have been widely distributed.73

With regard to the date of the Chicago portrait, it is apparent that it was created around A.D. 130 or after based on the articulation of the pupils and irises. Although the extant examples of the Vatican Busti 283 type have generally been dated to the Hadrianic period, if not to the latter part of Hadrian’s reign,74 it is not possible to rule out a slightly later date for the Chicago portrait, possibly in the years immediately following his death, in large part due to the Antonine stylistic features of his hair. Indeed, dates in the early Antonine period have been suggested for both the Liverpool and Rome portraits based on the comparable plasticity of the curls and the extensive drill work within the hairstyle, while a possible Antonine date has also been proposed for the Chania portrait due to its general similarities to the portraiture of Antoninus Pius.75 However, in the absence of further stylistic or contextual evidence suggesting the Chicago portrait’s posthumous creation, a date in the late Hadrianic period (A.D. 130/38) seems the most probable.

Portrait Formats: Freestanding Statues and Busts

Among the eight examples of the Vatican Busti 283 type, at least five can be clearly associated with either a full-figure statuary body or a freestanding bust. It is likely that the Chicago portrait was incorporated into one of these two formats.76

Statues

Portraits presented with full-length statuary bodies were frequently employed in the public sphere, where they typically served an honorific function.77 There were several basic body types available for use in imperial and private male portrait statues: wearing a toga, wearing a cuirass, or in the nude. These body types functioned as costumes that conveyed basic messages about the individual’s public roles, social status, virtues, and values.78 The toga identified the man as a Roman citizen or public officeholder.79 The cuirassed body type, complete with weapons and paludamentum, identified the subject as a military commander, an individual of military distinction (actual or honorary), or, in the case of the emperor, commander in chief.80 The nude body, which was considered an entirely artificial costume, informed the viewer of the individual’s virtuous character, masculinity, and strength.81 Less frequently, a statuary body might be clad in a pallium (the Roman version of the Greek himation) in order to identify a man as an intellectual, such as a philosopher or poet.82 Beyond these basic messages, the precise meaning of the likeness depended not only on the display context but also on the addition of attributes and gestures, through which the portrait of an emperor might be further distinguished from those of other individuals.83

Fifteen full-length statues of Hadrian of all portrait types are documented in current scholarship.84 In these portraits, Hadrian is shown with all three of the standard body types: togate, cuirassed, and heroically nude. The only example of the Vatican Busti 283 type known to have been incorporated into a full-length body is the example from Chania, which was found in the Diktynnaion sanctuary at Menies, Crete (fig. 6.12). This head and its cuirassed statuary body were largely destroyed by fire over a decade after the portrait’s discovery in 1913.85

Hadrian seems to have favored the cuirassed body type in his portraiture, possibly because he felt the need to project a strong military image to reinforce the impression of Rome’s strength and the security of its borders.86 Given the emperor’s role as the protector of the empire, his portraits may have been especially meaningful in the provinces of the Greek East, which bordered many of the conflict zones resulting from Trajan’s expansionist policies.87 The Chania portrait, with its cuirassed body and bearded head, might have conveyed to the viewer in Crete general messages of Hadrian’s military and political protection and potentially also a sense of his Greek cultural interests.

Busts

At least four examples of the Vatican Busti 283 type are freestanding busts.88 The freestanding bust, which was used for portraits of the imperial family and private individuals alike, has been described as the “quintessential Roman portrait format.”89 Unlike full-length portrait statues, which were primarily employed in the public sphere, the portrait bust could be displayed in a range of contexts, including public, domestic, and funerary settings.90 The same basic costumes that were used in statuary bodies of men also appear in busts, although there were some chronological and iconographic differences in their application in the two formats.91

The abbreviated format of the bust, which reached its maximum size during the reign of Hadrian in the portrait busts of Antinous, encouraged a different kind of engagement with the artwork than was achieved with a statue.92 On one level, the bust might have made a portrait more portable, allowing it to be moved around within a space to best suit the decorative and ideological message of a given moment. The bust might also have encouraged a closer, more intimate experience of the portrait on the part of the viewer, who might focus on the head as an expression of the subject’s identity and personal qualities.93

All four examples of the Vatican Busti 283 type that preserve traces of the bust are shown in some form of heroic nudity.94 The example in Rome , which preserves part of the proper right arm, shoulder, and chest but which is otherwise largely restored, might have been completely nude.95 It is possible, however, that there might have been a cloak over the missing proper left shoulder, a motif that appears in a portrait of Trajan of the so-called Dezennalientypus in the Musei Capitolini in Rome (fig. 6.13), the first clearly identified imperial type to be designed with the bust as an integral part of the portrait.96

The busts in Copenhagen, Naples, and Paris all incorporate a cloak that is draped over both shoulders and pinned on the proper right shoulder with a fibula.97 The cloak has commonly been identified as a paludamentum, which was worn by commanders in full military costume. Such an interpretation might suggest that these portraits were intended to evoke the emperor’s military superiority. All three are lacking a cuirass, however, instead representing the subject partially nude. This was a motif used in depictions of Greek heroes, who were typically shown wearing a chlamys.98 This combination of idealized nudity and the cloak might therefore refer to more general heroic ideals of strength, courage, and virtus, rather than to military prowess specifically.99 A heroic reading of the emperor is more likely intended here.100

Four of the five examples of the Vatican Busti 283 type that bear the closest similarities to the Chicago portrait in terms of hairstyle and physiognomy—those in Copenhagen, Naples, Paris, and Rome—are associated with nude or partially nude portrait busts. Consequently, it seems reasonable to surmise that the Chicago portrait might also have been part of a bust employing some form of the heroically nude costume.101

Display Contexts

If the Chicago portrait was formerly part of a portrait bust, its abbreviated format would probably have encouraged its display in a setting that permitted the viewer’s close observation of and engagement with Hadrian’s likeness, such as an imperial villa. Imperial villas served simultaneously as residences and administrative centers. They were large complexes where the emperor conducted business, albeit perhaps in a more informal manner than would pertain elsewhere.102 Consequently, the viewing audience in this setting included not only family members but also friends and political elites.

Portrait busts of sitting emperors, their predecessors, and other members of the imperial family have been found in a number of imperial villas in addition to Hadrian’s Villa at Tivoli, including the villa of Antoninus Pius at Lanuvium, the villa of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus at Acquatraversa, and the villa of Maxentius on the Via Appia.103 Although the functions of such portraits in these settings are not entirely clear, it is possible that they were displayed in ancestral portrait galleries or created as gifts to be exchanged between the emperor and private individuals.104 Given the association of the Rome and Erbach portraits with Hadrian’s Villa at Tivoli,105 the Vatican Busti 283 type may well have been considered appropriate for display in a lavish villa that functioned as both an imperial residence and an administrative seat.

The Chicago portrait (if a bust) might also have been displayed in an elite private residence either outside of Rome or elsewhere in the empire.106 The domestic display of an imperial portrait might have reflected the owner’s strong loyalty toward the emperor while also conferring an air of prestige. Or it might have been employed in a household’s private veneration of the emperor; in this case, the bust’s approachable format would no doubt have enhanced the viewer’s engagement with the emperor’s image.107

Alternatively, the portrait might instead have served an honorific purpose in a civic setting. Although there is little evidence for how busts were displayed on public monuments, the prevalence of the niche in different forms of imperial architecture, including civic structures such as theaters, baths (thermae), and monumental fountains (nymphaea), as well as in the back walls of colonnaded streets and squares, suggests that such works may well have been displayed in these settings alongside full-length statues.108

A portrait bust might also have been displayed in a sanctuary or temple, whether one dedicated to a specific deity or to the imperial cult, where it could function as an honorific portraitor a cult image.109 Numismatic evidence sheds some light on the display of portrait busts and statues in religious settings.110 For example, in a bronze coin of Caracalla from Side (in modern-day Turkey), the reverse depicts a draped, cuirassed bust of the emperor on a pedestal or an altar, beside which stands the Greek god Ares (equivalent to the Roman Mars) holding a spear in his right hand (fig. 6.14). Although such coin representations cannot typically inform us of the size of the original images, they nevertheless illustrate the presence of imperial busts and statues in religious contexts. Additionally, imperial busts might also have been carried in religious processions at imperial festivals and on other occasions due to their portable nature, indicating their dynamic function at such events.111

Conclusion

The success of the emperor’s image depended on the extent to which it was easily recognizable. Hadrian’s thick, curly hair and cropped beard undoubtedly played a critical role in his identification, as they helped to distinguish him from his predecessors with their forward-combed locks and clean-shaven visages. His broad, smooth face, almond-shaped eyes, and narrow lips were also defining features of his physiognomy.

Among the eight portrait types that depict Hadrian, the Vatican Busti 283 type is distinct for its voluminous, richly carved hairstyle, its equally skillful rendering of a closely cropped beard, and its relatively slender proportions. The Chicago portrait bears the hallmarks of the Vatican Busti 283 type, not only in its use of lavish, coloristic effects in the hair, which prefigure the styles employed in Antonine portraits, but also in the beard, which is so delicately carved that it barely augments the contours of the face. Although the face is unlined, the slightly more pronounced cheekbones and the subtle nasolabial folds hint at the emperor’s advancing age. Based on these features, as well as the fact that the eyes are enlivened with incised irises and drilled pupils—an innovation of around A.D. 130—it is likely that the portrait was created late in Hadrian’s reign.

While the portrait head functioned as the primary embodiment of the emperor’s identity, it was through its combination with a bust or full-length statuary body that the imperial image could convey a larger ideological message to the viewer that was specific to the context in which it was displayed. Among examples of the Vatican Busti 283 type, at least four portrait heads are attached to busts showing the emperor in some form of heroic nudity, conveying his masculinity and virtus. The Chicago portrait was therefore most probably part of a bust in antiquity, which may have been displayed in an imperial or private villa, or perhaps either in a public building or in the religious context of a sanctuary or temple.
Katharine A. Raff

Technical Report

Technical Summary

This portrait head is a fragment of a bust or statue depicting Emperor Hadrian (fig. 6.15). It was carved from a single block of exceptionally fine-grained, white marble that has been identified as Carrara. The carving itself is the work of a master sculptor whose artistry and adroit handling can be seen in the skillful use of drilling techniques and in the presence of decorative struts and bridges. An age-related patina and burial incrustations throughout the hair offer valuable evidence of antiquity. No indication of polychromy or gilding has been detected. During its time in the museum’s collection, the object has received one documented treatment, but, prior to its acquisition, the portrait underwent other campaigns of restoration, including the application of stone replacements at the nose and chin, as well as an acid cleaning.

Structure

Mineral/Chemical Composition

The stone is a cool, bright white with a somewhat gray-green tone overall.

Primary mineral: calcite (calcium carbonate, CaCO₃)112

Accessory minerals: graphite, C (abundant); opaque minerals (traces)113

Petrographic Description

A triangular sample 1.8 cm high by 1 cm wide was removed from a small projection of stone at the bottom edge of the neck on the proper right side, approximately 5 cm in from the back. The sample was then used to perform minero-petrographic analysis. Part of the sample was finely ground, and the resulting powder was analyzed using X-ray diffraction to determine whether dolomite is present. The remaining portion of the sample was mounted onto a glass slide and ground to a thickness of 30 µm for study under a polarizing microscope.114

Grain size: fine (average MGS less than 2 mm)

Maximum grain size (MGS): 0.56 mm

Fabric: homeoblastic mosaic, polygonal with triple points115

Calcite boundaries: straight-curved

Microscopic examination of the prepared thin-section sample revealed slight decohesion.116

Thin-section photomicrograph: fig. 6.16

Provenance

Marble type: Carrara (marmor lunense)117

Quarry site: Carrara region, Apuan Alps, Italy118

The determination of the marble as Carrara was made on the basis of the results of both minero-petrographic analysis and isotopic analysis.119

Isotopic ratio diagram: fig. 6.17

Fabrication

Method

The object was carved in the round from a single block of stone using the various hand tools and implements that would have been customary for the period, such as chisels, drills, rasps, and scrapers.120

The head is a fragment of a slightly over life-size bust or statue.121 The bottom of the neck is angled forward and is somewhat flat, reminiscent of a straight butt join. The surfaces of straight butt joins are often keyed to provide extra tooth for a mortar or adhesive. The surface of this break edge, however, is highly irregular and shows signs of intentional damage. Long drill holes extend from the outer margins of the neck toward the center (fig. 6.18), and deep gouges made with a flat chisel are also visible (fig. 6.19). Neither of these marks is characteristic of the keying seen on ancient join faces. In addition, the chisel marks extend into areas of adhesive residue. The adhesive is decidedly modern in appearance, and its copious application indicates that it was intended to fill gaps as well as bond.122 It is therefore reasonable to assume that the head was attached to something else in a modern restoration campaign and subsequently removed.123

Evidence of Construction/Fabrication

The portrait was finished to a high degree, and early stages of carving were fully removed from all areas that would have been visible in antiquity. The extent of the surface finish, compounded by the effects of a subsequent, overzealous cleaning, has left few discernible toolmarks on the surface.

The faint traces that do remain are a testament to the consummate skill of the sculptor. In order to render the depth and volume of Hadrian’s hair, the artist made extensive use of a drill and a channeling tool. Each curl was created by piercing the stone at intervals with a very narrow drill, approximately 2 mm in diameter. This network of holes was then excavated with a channeling tool or small roundel.124 In a few isolated areas, remnants of the drill holes can just barely be seen within the deepest of the carved lines (see fig. 6.20). In one instance it is clear that the sculptor applied a bit too much pressure, drilling too far into the stone and leaving behind a hole that could not be fully cleared (fig. 6.21).

A drill was used to delineate the contours of the ears, as evidenced by the circular depressions seen at the ends of the lines of carving (see fig. 6.22). Half of a drill hole is also visible in what remains of the proper right nostril.

At the back of the head, where the impression of depth and volume was less important, the sculptor rendered the curls using a small roundel, painstakingly delineating individual strands of hair. This workmanship is well preserved on the crown of the head, where it may have been protected by an overlying incrustation that has since been removed (fig. 6.23). Although the detail in the curls on the front of the head has been considerably diminished by exposure and aggressive cleaning, it is safe to assume that the front of the hair was originally carved to a similar degree of detail as the back.

The rendering of the beard, although much affected by the cleaning, is equally sensitive. The larger tufts of hair were also created with the roundel but were highlighted, and individual hairs emphasized, by the selective use of a flat chisel turned on its edge (fig. 6.24).

Within the carving of the hair, the sculptor left small bridges connecting several curls (see fig. 6.25 and fig. 6.26). Generally speaking, struts and bridges are employed where added strength or support is needed. Given the sizes and locations of these small projections, it seems very unlikely that such minuscule quantities of stone serve any structural function. Their purpose was more likely decorative, and they are a further display of virtuosity on the part of the artist.125

Artist’s/Fabricator’s Marks

No artist’s or fabricator’s marks were observed.

Additional or Applied Materials

Microscopic examination of the stone’s surfaces revealed no traces of polychromy or gilding.126

Condition Summary

The fragment is itself fragmentary. A break extends from the nape of the neck to the jawline and continues downward to the base of the throat. Along this trajectory, smaller fragments can be seen in association with the primary break. This damage is visible to the naked eye, but its extent becomes all the more apparent under ultraviolet radiation (fig. 6.27).127 These areas of damage were at some point cursorily restored by bonding and filling with a resin, now yellowed.128 In several places the resin was bulked with aggregates, most likely marble powder or dust, in an effort to mimic the stone, and in other places the surface of the repairs was retouched with what could be, judging by the way it has aged, an oil-based paint. Within the beard, particularly on the proper right side, the fills were crudely scratched or carved in an attempt to mimic the whorls in the hair, causing a great deal of associated damage to the surrounding stone.

The portrait is bereft of its nose and a large portion of the chin on the proper right side. These areas once bore stone replacements, as indicated by the presence of dowel holes. The vestiges of the nose were cut flat and smoothed prior to receiving the stone restoration. At a later point, the nose was removed, the centrally located dowel hole in the nose was filled with a resin, and the break edge was retouched in an effort to mimic age-related staining and soiling. For the restoration of the chin, the contour of the break was left rough, and three holes in a triangular configuration were drilled to accommodate the dowels. This restoration was also removed at some point. The dowel hole closest to the center of the chin was filled with resin, but the two holes on the proper right side remain plugged with the marble dowels (fig. 6.28).

Numerous losses are visible on the tips and high-relief areas of the curls framing the face and ears. The outside edges of both ears are missing. Chips and losses are visible all around the break edge of the neck, with two particularly conspicuous lacunae on the front of the neck. The underlying stone exposed in these lacunae displays a sugary texture.

Further damages and blemishes exist. A deep puncture with heavy associated bruising is visible just above the proper right tear duct (fig. 6.29). Aspects of this anomaly appear deliberate; it may have been a failed, initial attempt at recutting in an effort to resharpen the contours of the eyes. Large spalls can be seen below the proper right eye and on the lower lip on the proper left side. Elsewhere numerous small spots of blanching, bruises, pockmarks, and scratches are evident. An area of particularly heavy scratching is present within the beard near the proper left jawline.

Localized orange staining and reddish-brown incrustations, probably indicating an iron-rich burial environment, are visible on the back of the head, concentrated in a circular patch at the crown (fig. 6.23). Given the degree of preservation of the carving in this area, it seems likely that this circular patch was at one time a concretion that protected the underlying stone.129 A distinct yellowish-brown patina is visible throughout the hair, particularly atop the points of highest relief on the curls at the front of the head.130

The surface of the stone bears the telltale soapy appearance of an acid cleaning.131 This waxy sheen is particularly noticeable within the beard along the sides of the face and inside the ears. The caustic action of this treatment obliterated much of the fine detail of the carving, in particular the incised details in the eyes (fig. 6.30). This aggressive cleaning notwithstanding, the surface of the stone imparts an overall impression of soiling and wear.

Conservation History

The object has received one documented treatment during its time in the museum’s collection, carried out shortly after acquisition. The goal of the treatment was to ameliorate the considerable dirt and soiling noted in the incoming statement of condition. The surface of the marble was first warmed and rinsed multiple times with an aqueous solution. To remove more-ingrained dirt, the surface was cleaned with a saponified and buffered solution of distilled water. Successive applications of a buffered aqueous gel were used to mitigate heavy incrustation and soiling around the crown of the head. A final poultice of distilled water was applied to the treated area to ensure complete removal of the gel from the stone.132
Rachel C. Sabino, with contributions by Lorenzo Lazzarini

20) Such events might include the emperor’s accession to power, jubilees such as the decennalia and the vicennalia, and military victories; see Riccardi, “Uncanonical Imperial Portraits,” p. 112; Albertson, “Creation and Dissemination,” p. 286; Fejfer, Roman Portraits in Context, p. 410. An empress might receive a new portrait type on occasions such as her elevation to Augusta or the birth of a child; see Kleiner, Roman Sculpture, p. 278 (on the portraiture of Faustina the Younger). Fejfer has questioned whether new portrait types were required when portraits were erected in honor of such occasions; see Fejfer, Ince Blundell Collection, p. 14. They might also have been created following a shift in political policy or, more simply, to update the image of an aging ruler; see Albertson, “Creation and Dissemination,” p. 286 n. 85; Wood, “Portraiture,” p. 264.

21) For the likelihood that such prototypes were designed in Rome, see Kellum, “Imperial Messages,” p. 425. See also Fejfer, Roman Portraits in Context, pp. 410 (centrally designed in Rome), 418–19 (competing workshops).

An underlying assumption of this methodology is that the same official portrait models that were circulated to sculptors who worked in marble and bronze were also circulated to the die engravers who produced numismatic portraits. Consequently, coins are thought to provide critical evidence for the identification of sculpted portrait types, as they include not only numismatic portraits but also inscriptions, which shed light on the identity of the subject and possibly also the date of the portrait type’s creation. However, portrait types cannot always be clearly correlated with specific coins, meaning that the latter cannot be relied on to provide absolute dates. On the assumption that the same portrait models were circulated to sculptors and die engravers, see Fittschen, “Zum angeblichen Bildnis,” pp. 219–24; see also Albertson, “Creation and Dissemination,” p. 286. On the ancient viewer’s ability to recognize the emperor depicted on coins, see Hekster, “Coins and Messages,” pp. 20–21. On the problems associated with the use of numismatic evidence in the identification of typologies, see Fejfer, Roman Portraits in Context, p. 411.

32) Hadrian’s portrait types include the following: (1) Typus Stazione Termini, (2) Typus Vatikan Chiaramonti 392, (3) Typus Rollockenfrisur Terme 8618, (4) Typus Panzer-Paludamentumbüste Baiae, (5) Typus Panzerbüste Imperatori 32, (6) Typus Paludamentumbüste Vatikan Busti 283, (7) Typus Tarragona, (8) Typus Delta Omikron or Typus Hadrianus Renatus. On types 1–6, see Wegner, Hadrian, Plotina, pp. 8–26. On type 7, see Fittschen and Zanker, Katalog der römischen Porträts, vol. 1, pp. 57–58, cat. 54, pl. 60; Evers, Les portraits d’Hadrien, pp. 240–45. For a succinct summary of the basic characteristics of types 1–7, see Kleiner, Roman Sculpture, pp. 238–41. On type 8, see Hannestad, “Über das Grabmal des Antinoos,” pp. 99–101; Evers, Les portraits d’Hadrien, pp. 273–77; Bergmann, “Zu den Porträts des Trajan und Hadrian,” pp. 144–45; Opper, Hadrian: Empire and Conflict, pp. 58–60, figs. 40, 44; Sinn and Söldner, “Die Bildhauerkunst,” pp. 222–24.

34) The examples of the Vatican Busti 283 type are as follows: (1) Musei Vaticani, Museo Pio Clementino, Rome, 724. Hadrianic period. Nude bust, with restorations in the chest, proper left arm, and proper left shoulder; the proper right shoulder, proper right arm, and part of the chest on the proper right side are ancient. Found at Hadrian’s Villa at Tivoli. See Amelung, Die Sculpturen des Vaticanischen Museums, p. 482, cat. 283, pl. 64; Raeder, Die statuarische Ausstattung, pp. 105–06, cat. I 123. (2) Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen, 777. A.D. 125/38. Nude bust with paludamentum. Acquired in Rome in 1889; said to have been discovered in Rome shortly before the time of purchase. See Poulsen, Catalogue of Ancient Sculpture, p. 476, cat. 681; Poulsen, Les portraits romains, vol. 2, p. 70, cat. 42, pls. 69–70; Johansen, Roman Portraits, vol. 2, pp. 112–13, cat. 41. (3) Gräfliche Sammlungen Schloss Erbach, Germany, 20. Early Hadrianic period. Head on separately carved, cuirassed statue. Said to have been found at Hadrian’s Villa at Tivoli, Italy. See Fittschen, Katalog der antiken Skulpturen in Schloss Erbach, pp. 72–74, cat. 24, pls. 27–28; Kleiner, Roman Sculpture, p. 241. (4) Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli, Naples, 6069. Late Hadrianic period. Nude bust with paludamentum. From Italy, Farnese collection (formerly in Rome). See Museo Nazionale di Napoli, Le collezioni, vol. 2, p. 160, cat. 48. (5) Musée du Louvre, Paris, Ma 1189. Nude bust with paludamentum. Formerly Campana collection; said to have been found in Rome on the Esquiline. See d’Escamps, Description des marbres antiques, p. 88. (6) National Museums Liverpool, World Museum, 1959-148.84. Late Hadrianic or early Antonine period. Head on an ancient bust (dated A.D. 140/80) to which it did not originally belong. The head was at one time joined to a different, smaller nude bust with a paludamentum that might have been of Hadrianic date, as suggested by its depiction in an engraving dated to 1776/79. The head appears to have been in the Mattei collection in Rome by 1614 and thereafter in the Ince Blundell collection in England, the sculptures of which were given to the city of Liverpool in 1959. See Poulsen and Richards, Greek and Roman Portraits, p. 76, cat. 61; Ashmole, Catalogue of the Ancient Marbles, p. 41, cat. 84, pl. 37; Fejfer, Ince Blundell Collection, pp. 56–59, cat. 26, pls. 51–52, and pp. 24–25 on the gifting of the Ince Blundell collection to the city of Liverpool. (7) Archaeological Museum of Chania, Crete, Λ 77. 2nd century A.D. Head wearing a corona civica on a separately carved, cuirassed statue. Found in 1913 in the Diktynnaion (sanctuary of the goddess Diktynna) at Menies, Kissamos, Crete, which was largely destroyed by fire over a decade later. See Vermeule, Roman Imperial Art in Greece and Asia Minor, p. 391, cat. 7, fig. 135.

On these portraits, see also Wegner, Hadrian, Plotina, pp. 95 (Chania), 96 (Erbach), 98 (Liverpool, listed as Ince Blundell Hall), 99 (Copenhagen), 103 (Naples), 104 (Paris), 110 (Rome); Fittschen and Zanker, Katalog der römischen Porträts, vol. 1, p. 58, cat. 54, n. 1, a–h; Evers, Les portraits d’Hadrien, p. 97, cat. 23, ill. 6 (Chania); p. 103, cat. 30, ill. 7 (Copenhagen); p. 109, cat. 37, ill. 55 (Erbach); p. 122, cat. 54, ill. 10 (Liverpool); pp. 133–35, cat. 68, ills. 12–13, 45 (Naples); pp. 146–47, cat. 83, ill. 15 (Paris); pp. 172–73, cat. 118, ill. 54 (Rome). For the possible addition of the Liverpool and Chania portraits to the type, see Fittschen and Zanker, Katalog der römischen Porträts, vol. 1, p. 58, cat. 54. Cécile Evers included both; see Evers, Les portraits d’Hadrien, pp. 259–60.

42) Kleiner, Roman Sculpture, p. 238; Vout, “What’s in a Beard?,” p. 99; Opper, Hadrian: Empire and Conflict, p. 69. The beard was worn on occasion by several earlier emperors. For example, Octavian was shown with a beard shortly before he became Augustus, while the emperors Nero (r. A.D. 54–68), Titus (r. A.D. 79–81), and Domitian (r. A.D. 81–96) were all shown bearded during their reigns. However, it was not a consistent feature of the portrait typologies of these emperors, and the material evidence for the bearded representations is largely restricted to coins. For possible explanations for these imperial beards, see Vout, “Revision of Hadrian’s Portraiture,” pp. 454–55; Vout, “What’s in a Beard?,” pp. 119–20. For an image of Nero wearing a beard in the Art Institute’s collection, see cat. 41, Aureus (Coin) Portraying Emperor Nero.

72) The difficulties in dating Hadrian’s portrait types, including the Vatican Busti 283 type, are compounded by the lack of a full concordance of Hadrian’s numismatic and extant sculpted portraits; see Fejfer, Ince Blundell Collection, pp. 56–57, cat. 26; Mägele, “Colossal Portrait,” p. 52. Evers suggested that several coins in the Magnaguti collection in Mantua, Italy, which are dated late in Hadrian’s reign or after his death, might offer useful comparisons for dating the Vatican Busti 283 type due to their depiction of hairstyles with distinct locks that resemble those of the hair index; see Evers, Les portraits d’Hadrien, p. 266 n. 90 (citing Magnaguti, Ex nummis historia, vol. 3, nos. 494, 525, 538). However, in the Magnaguti publication it is not possible to clearly discern each of the specific locks that Evers identified in the hairstyles of these coin portraits.

In the absence of clear numismatic evidence, the possibility cannot be eliminated that the type was developed at an earlier stage of Hadrian’s reign and reproduced at a later date. To this point, see Fittschen, Katalog der antiken Skulpturen in Schloss Erbach, p. 73, cat. 24. Indeed, multiple portrait types were used concurrently for other imperial personages. On the simultaneous use of two types in the portraiture of Marcus Aurelius, see Albertson, “Creation and Dissemination,” pp. 297–99.

80) For cuirassed statues and military commanders, see Hallett, Roman Nude, p. 218. Cuirassed statues were more frequently used in images of imperial and elite individuals, although private individuals, particularly those who were honored for their important military achievements, might also be shown in this format; see Fejfer, Roman Portraits in Context, p. 212. For the cuirassed body type as an indicator of the emperor’s role as commander in chief, see Opper, Hadrian: Empire and Conflict, p. 69. H. Russell Robinson suggested that the cuirass would likely have been too costly for the average soldier to afford as part of his armor; see Robinson, Armour of Imperial Rome, p. 149. On cuirasses in Roman sculpture, see Vermeule, “Hellenistic and Roman Cuirassed Statues”; Gergel, “Costume as Geographic Indicator.” See also cat. 50, Aureus (Coin) Portraying Emperor Hadrian, the obverse of which depicts Hadrian wearing the cuirass and paludamentum.

82) On the pallium as a garment associated with intellectual life, see Cleland, Davies, and Llewellyn-Jones, Greek and Roman Dress, p. 137; Fejfer, Roman Portraits in Context, p. 200. For the pallium as a garment worn by Romans in the country, while abroad, and on less formal occasions, see Goldman, “Reconstructing Roman Clothing,” p. 229. On the associations of the pallium with the Greek world and luxury, see Edmondson, “Public Dress and Social Control,” pp. 35–36. On changing attitudes toward the pallium in the imperial period and its wearing by public officeholders, see Zanker, Mask of Socrates, pp. 281–82. The costume of the himation and chiton, which had been the dress of the Greek civilian since the classical period, remained fashionable in the Greek East into the imperial period—perhaps superseding the wearing of the toga—and was frequently depicted in portrait statues in this region of the empire; see Smith, “Cultural Choice and Political Identity,” p. 65. See also the statue of Hadrian in Greek dress, from Cyrene (A.D. 117/25; British Museum, London, 1861,1127.23). This portrait was long thought to provide visual evidence of his philhellenism and his interest in Greek intellectual life. However, it has recently been identified as a Victorian pastiche combining a head of Hadrian and a himation-clad body; see Opper, Hadrian: Empire and Conflict, pp. 68–70, fig. 53. On a headless bronze statue thought to depict an emperor (perhaps Marcus Aurelius) in a himation, see Kozloff, “Cleveland Bronze.”

114) The thin-section petrography and X-ray diffraction were performed at the Laboratorio di Analisi dei Materiali Antichi (LAMA), Università IUAV, Venice, by Lorenzo Lazzarini, Director, LAMA. The purpose of the minero-petrographic analysis was to determine the following parameters: (1) the type of fabric (either homeoblastic or heteroblastic, the former consisting of grains of roughly equal dimensions and the latter consisting of grains of variable dimensions), which is directly related to the type of metamorphism (equilibrium, nonequilibrium, retrograde, or polymetamorphism); (2) the boundary shapes of the calcite/dolomite grains, which are also correlated with the types of metamorphic events that generated the marble; (3) the maximum grain size, a parameter that has diagnostic significance because it is linked to the grade of metamorphism achieved by the marble; and (4) the qualitative and semiqualitative presence of accessory minerals, which are sometimes of diagnostic value. In the formulation of the petrographic description, previous specific studies of the most important “major” ancient marbles (Gorgoni et al., “Reference Database”; Lazzarini, Moschini, and Stievano, “Contribution to the Identification”), other archaeometric studies of “minor” marbles, and seminal treatises on petrotectonics (e.g., Spry, Metamorphic Textures) were taken into consideration. Lazzarini, “Report on the Results,” pp. 1–2. This essay is greatly indebted not only to Lorenzo Lazzarini’s analysis, which facilitated a better understanding of this object in the newly cast light of its secure attribution with respect to marble type and provenance, but also to his graciousness and generosity in sharing the vast knowledge and wisdom acquired over the course of his decades-long career.

118) Marmor lunense, so called by the Romans because the quarries were under the control of the town of Luna, near Carrara, was quarried to a limited extent by the Etruscans from the sixth to the second centuries B.C. Later, from the middle of the first century B.C. to the end of the second century A.D, it was quarried in larger amounts. At the end of this period, the canal harbor on the Magra River silted up, making it difficult and expensive to transport the marble from the quarries to Rome and thus leading to a precipitous drop in its use in the capital. The main quarries were situated along the three valleys of Torano, Miseglia, and Colonnata in the province of Carrara. The best marble—pure white with a fine, homogeneous grain size, referred to as statuario—was quarried in the Torano valley. Given the large supply, marmor lunense would have been quite inexpensive. Lazzarini, “Report on the Results,” p. 3. See also Bruno et al., “Provenance and Distribution of White Marbles”; Dolci, Carrara; Gnoli, Marmora romana; Lazzarini, “Considerazioni sul prezzo dei marmi”; and Paribeni, “Problemi del marmo.”

119) The stable isotope ratio analysis was done at the Isotopen Labo, Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (FAU), Germany, and interpreted by Lorenzo Lazzarini, Director, LAMA. Isotopic characterization has proved to be very useful in the identification of ancient marble. Its use is becoming more and more widespread owing to its outstanding sensitivity, the small quantity of material necessary for the analysis, and the availability of a rapidly growing isotopic database, often associated with other laboratory methodologies (Attanasio, Brilli, and Ogle, Isotopic Signature of Classical Marbles; Barbin et al., “Cathodoluminescence”; Gorgoni et al., “Reference Database”; Lazzarini, “Archaeometric Aspects of White and Coloured Marbles”), that permits increasingly trustworthy comparisons, especially if the isotopic data are evaluated together with the minero-petrographic results from the same samples, as in the present study. The present study used reference data from petrographic databases as well as data compiled from thin-section samples taken in fifty ancient Mediterranean marble quarries. Lazzarini, “Report on the Results,” pp. 2, 3.

Isotopic analysis was carried out on the carbon dioxide derived from a small portion (20–30 mg) of the powdered sample obtained through dissolution by phosphoric acid at 25°C in a vacuum line, according to the procedure suggested by McCrea, “Isotopic Chemistry of Carbonates,” and Craig, “Isotopic Standards for Carbon and Oxygen.” The resulting carbon dioxide was then analyzed using mass spectrometry. The mass spectrometer is fitted with a triple collector and permits the measurement of both isotopic ratios (¹³C/¹²C and ¹⁸O/¹⁶O) at the same time. The analytical results are conventionally expressed in δ units, in parts per thousand, in which δ = (R_sample/R_std – 1) × 1000, and R_sample and R_std represent the isotope ratios of oxygen and carbon in the sample and in the reference standard, respectively. The standard adopted is PDB, or δ¹³C, for both oxygen and carbon. The PDB standard for isotope ratio measurements in carbonates is the rostrum of the Belemnitella americana, a Cretaceous marine fossil from the Pee Dee Formation in South Carolina. Lazzarini, “Report on the Results,” p. 2.

124) The so-called honeycombing method described here is the most laborious means by which to create grooves in marble. Sculptors may have chosen this method because it was deemed safer and offered more control. In another method, the running drill, the drill was rotated at a sharp angle to the stone, cutting a groove as it was moved along. The same tool was used for both; only the method of application differed. Great controversy surrounds the running drill with respect to the date of its introduction and the extent of its use. Olga Palagia discussed the physical evidence of the drill marks left in the Parthenon pediments (where the heart of the controversy lies) and found sufficient proof that their sculptors employed both methods. Palagia, “Marble Carving Techniques,” pp. 253–60. Amanda Claridge, on the contrary, has stated that the running drill is “a phantom, based on a misunderstanding of the German ‘laufende Bohrer.’” Claridge, “Marble Carving Techniques,” p. 108.

127) Ultraviolet-induced visible light fluorescence was among the first technical examination methods to be employed in the service of investigating art objects, and, although there is some subjectivity in the interpretation of the fluorescence, it remains the technique most universally chosen as a first step in examining works of art. UV radiation causes unique patterns of fluorescence in a wide array of materials, and the color and intensity of the fluorescence help to differentiate between original materials and alterations, be they wholesale additions or surface modifications. Very broadly speaking, with respect to marble, a newly broken or modern surface will appear bright purple when exposed to UV radiation, whereas an intact, ancient surface will appear white, yellow, or amber. An older but not necessarily ancient surface will appear more blue. See Rorimer, Ultra-Violet Rays, pp. 17–23. This phenomenon can be exploited to reveal parts of a sculpture that may have been recently cleaned or treated; may have been recut or replaced; or may retain pigments, coatings, or colorants. See Grossman and Maish, “Authenticity of a Classical Attic Funerary Monument.” For further information on the refinement of UV/visible fluorescence imaging since 1931 and its reliability in the examination of marble artifacts, see Polikreti, “Detection of Ancient Marble Forgery”; Polikreti and Christofides, “Composition Profiles and Time Evolution”; Polikreti and Christofides, “Laser-Induced Micro-photoluminescence”; and Polikreti and Christofides, “Role of Humic Substances.”

130) Patina is a vague and ambiguous term, and a number of scholars have debated the appropriateness of its use with stone. Indeed, a variety of other terms refer to the numerous types of films seen on the surfaces of ancient stone: scialbatura, epidermis or marble skin, hardening paste, rock or desert varnish, mineral deposit, and weathering crust, to name but a few. Many ancient marble sculptures may have either lost their patinas, perhaps in the course of restoration, or received artificial patinas, applied in an effort to mimic an ancient surface. Of the several types of naturally occurring patinas, as opposed to man-made ones, two predominate: those composed of calcium carbonate crusts and those composed of oxalates. For a concise review of both types, see Craddock, Scientific Investigation of Copies, pp. 254–57. For further information, see cat. 1, Statue of a Young Boy, para. 75, note 106.