The Learned Collector: Mythological Statuettes and Classical Taste in Late Antique Gaul

Notes

Notes chapter 1 An important new study of domestic sculpture in Ephesos appeared too late in the manuscript process to be incorporated into this volume: Maria Aurenhammer, “Skulpturen aus Stein und Bronze,” in Hanghaus 1 in Ephesos: Funde und Ausstattung , ed. C. Lang-Auinger (Forschungen in Ephesos 8.4; Vienna, 2003) 153–208. 1. Chapter 5 contains a lengthier discussion of Ausonius and Martin. All references to Ausonius’s works are numbered in accordance with the edition by R. P. H. Green (1991). 2. On mosaics and silverware, see, for instance, Dunbabin 1978; Shelton 1981; Mundell Mango and Bennet 1994. The catalogue of an epochal exhibit of late antique art in 1979 (Weitzman 1979) makes few references to mythological sculpture but perceptively explores mythological imagery in other media and the changing meaning of mythological images in late antiquity. Reflecting changes in research directions, mythological statuary is more extensively represented in the catalogue of a recent large show on late antiquity (Ensoli and La Rocca 2000). 3. For instance, Brinkerhoff 1970; Gazda 1981, 125–78; Christof 2001. Bente Kiilerich’s study of the “plastic arts” (1993) discusses mythological sculpture briefly but does not explore the subject at length. 4. Wrede 1972, 97–101. 5. Katakes 2002, 23–25, no. 21; 73–75, no. 70; 200–205. By contrast, Theodosia Stefanidou-Tiveriou (1993) argues that both statuettes were earlier pieces reused in the fourth century. 6. Smith 1990, 129; Mansuelli 1958, vol. 1. 164, no. 140. 7. Kaiseraugst: Kaufmann-Heinimann 1984. Daphne-Harbie: Ross 1953; Mundell Mango 1986, 271, no. 98. 8. Kiilerich 1993, 149–51. 9. These stylistic characteristics and the basis for the date will be explored in detail in chapter 4, with appropriate documentation and comparanda. 10. Fullerton (1998) explores the difficulties of using labels such as classicizing or archaizing and notes the absence of a descriptor for later works influenced by Hellenistic styles (71). 233 11. Kiilerich (1993, 189–92) discusses the eclecticism of classicizing art of the closing decades of the fourth century and the continuity of classicizing art through the fourth century (220–34). 12. Balmelle 2001. 13. Finds from Saint-Georges-de-Montagne are presented at greater length in Stirling 1996a. 14. Fouet 1969. 15. Joulin 1901. 16. Gazda 1981, 141–48 (date of Ganymede), 150–60 (Venus and Diana). 17. For instance, Bonfante and Carter 1987, 247–57; Merker 1987. 18. Erim and Roueché 1982. 19. Steinby 1986, 141; Moltesen 2000. This group and the apparently contradictory epigraphic data are further discussed in chapter 4 of the present study. 20. For instance, Erim 1990; Smith 1990, 1996. 21. Rockwell 1991; Van Voorhis 1999. 22. For instance Willers 1996; Filges 1999. 23. Stirling 1994; Hannestad 1994; M. Bergmann 1999. 24. The book is reviewed by Varner (1995) and Claridge (1997). 25. This is also acknowledged by M. Bergmann (1999, 13, 60). 26. M. Bergmann (1999, 69) cites Stirling 1994 on these topics. 27. For reasons of conservation, I have not been able to obtain permission for isotopic testing on finds from Saint-Georges-de-Montagne or Chiragan. 28. Here and elsewhere, I use the word Asian in its Roman sense as the adjective for Asia Minor. 29. For exclusivity in education, see Brown 1992, 39–41; Scott 1997. 30. Roberts 1989a. 31. Mathisen 1993, 105–18; Marrou 1956, 330–52. 32. Marvin 1983. chapter 2 1. Philippe Jockey (1996) addresses some of these questions in less detail. 2. Visconti 1885; Guidobaldi 1986, 194–98; Ensoli and La Rocca 2000, 454–55, nos. 43–45; Ensoli Vitozzi 1993. 3. Fouet 1969, 94–95, fig. 47. 4. Brueckner 1926, 129–32; Merritt 1961, 248–49. 5. Frisch 1975, no. 63. 6. Corinth sculpture inv. no. S-1999-02; for the general context of discovery, see G. D. R. Sanders 2001. 7. The following arguments are summarized from Coates-Stephens 2001. 8. Prioritizing the evidence from brick stamps, he accepts a construction date in the time of Maxentius or even Diocletian for a bath building whose walls contained a base signed by one of the sculptors of the controversial Esquiline group (Coates-Stephens 2001, 219). This topic is further discussed in chapter 4 of the present study. 9. That pagan aristocrats such as these incorporated broken statuary as building material illustrates that such treatment need not be ideologically driven. Notes to Pages 3–18 234 10. So Neudecker (1988) has argued from...