Alba Regia. Annales Musei Stephani Regis. – Alba Regia. Az István Király Múzeum Évkönyve. 21. 1981 – Szent István Király Múzeum közleményei: C sorozat (1984)
Bronzes romains figurés et appliqués et leurs problémes techniques. Actes du VIIe Colloque International sur les bronzes antiques - Zadoks-Josephus Jitta, A. N.: Roman bronze statuettes: another approach to dating. p. 9–11. t. I–IV.
Boucher in her all-embracing publications adds to similar suggestions numismatic and iconographical considerations (BOUCHER 1976, 241—260). This we will elaborate in our own special way and that in connection with imperial policy. For imperial policy finds its immediate echo in the choice of gods represented and the way of representing them. Subsequently Mercurius, Mars, Minerva, Jupiter, Mercurius again, and Hercules were the imperial favourites. Consequently their statuettes became fashionable and were also exported in more or less large numbers. This export was in the hands of itinerant merchants, mercatores or negotiatores, who distributed the products of the various centres of manufacture. They probably applied the principle of marketing, I am no economist but I understand marketing as convincing people they urgently need something they do not need at all and even do not know the existence of. As the provincial public had no clear anthropomorphic image of their own gods, they were easily convinced to interpret as such the representations offered to them. Next to these traders there may have been initerant craftsmen who worked locally ; this may explain the occasional occurrence of miscasts. I will illustrate our theory with a few examples. It is well known that Augustus liked to present himself as Novus Mercurius (Brendel 1935, 231—259) and that not in the sense of the ancient god of commerce but of Hellenistic Hermes, who bestowed welfare, both material and spiritual. In this he followed the example of Hellenistic rulers who thus symbolized and proclaimed the benefits of their reign. Therefore we may safely assume that the bronze statuettes representing standing Mercurius in divine near-nudity after the Greek fashion are to be dated to the period of Augustus and his immediate successors (PI. 1,1). (1) The motif of Mercurius standing continues, but when he was rendered wearing a petasos (PI. I, 2), there is no more question of imperial identification, for no emperor would dare to present himself with a headgear so quaint in Roman eyes. Nero continued the Julio-Claudian policy but introduced a new motif. He commissioned the sculptor Zenodorus (Pling N.H. 34,45) to make a statue of Mercurius for the temple of the Averni at Puy-le-Dome in French Auvergne, thus firmly establishing in Gaul an acceptable form of imperial cult. It was a seated nude statue as is depicted on a votive relief from Dutch Horn, which, according to its inscription, was dedicated by a merchant from Auvergne (Pl. II, 4). A contemporary copy is to be seen in the famous bronze statue from Herculaneum. It is clearly reflected in this statuette from Friesland (ZADOKS 1967, 60—61) thus to be dated to the second half of the 1st century AD (PI. II, 1). Domitian goes one step further; witness a bronze statuette depicting him in the guise of seated Mercurius (PI. II, 2; BABELON-BLANCHET 1895, 365—366). Such a statuette from Switzerland may represent Trajan (MANFRINI 1978, 37—38), who liked to follow Augustus. <2) The motif of the seated Mercurius continues; it is even found among the 4th-century marble statues from the London (1) During the congress the bronze statue from Magdalensberg (closly resembling our nude staneing Mercurii) was Mithraeum (TOYNBEE 1962, 3. Pi. XXXI). As to this statuette —which we irreverently call the sluggish Mercurius (Pi. II, 3)—the headgear alone already indicates that the age of identification has passed (ZADOKS e.a. 1973, 16, no 18.). It is meant to be a petasos but looks more like a Dutch woollen cap. Its style points to the 3rd century AD. At the end of the 2nd century AD Mercurius again comes to the fore, not representing the emperor but in his own divine right. For to him is attributed the rain miracle which saved the army of Marcus Aurelius during his campaign against the Quadi in 172/3 AD. A temple with a cult statue was dedicated to Mercurius in Rome; we know it from contemporary denarii, one showing the temple with statue, the other the statue alone (Pi. Ill, 2) which depicts the god fully clad and wearing a petasos (KENT e.a. 1973, PI. LXXXVI, 346; Pl. LXXXVII, 347). We may conclude that bronze statuettes which depict the god in this way, date from the last quarter of the 2nd century (PI. Ill, 1). Domitian's favourite deity, however, was the goddess Minerva. Naturally it was a case of veneration, not of identification. He built two temples for her, one at the entrance to the Porticus Diuorum enclosing temples to the Divi Vespasian and Titus, one at the Transitorium between the fora of Augustus and of Vespasian, dedicated by his successor Nerva and named after him (COARELLI 1975 2 , 211, 264). The splendid marble statue of winged Minerva at Ostia dates from Domitian's reign (CALZA —NASH 1959, PI. VIII). Thus we may attribute the carefully worked Minerva which I show you here, (Pi. Ill, 4) to the same period; it is, moreover, stylistically close to the equally fine statuette which we have recognized as the Juno of Domitia (PI. Ill, 3), one of the few examples, by the way, of dating by objective criteria, especially the hairdress (Acta Congress Berlin). Both statuettes show the same blend of majesty and elegance and the same svelte proportion. The predominance of Minerva was of short duration, for in the 2nd century AD Jupiter came to the fore. Stoicism had laid stress on the aspect of Jupiter as maintainer of moral values and of law and order; as these, in Roman thought, were embodied in the Roman state, Jupiter became its divine representative. As early as the 1st century AD, the more ambitious emperors tried not only to obtain Jupiter's support but also to present themselves as his earthly representatives. But they were careful not to give offence and imperial portrait statues in the guise of Jupiter mainly appear outside Rome or are porthumous. The seated Jupiter Capitolinus served as a model. In the 2nd century ВС Jupiter's position gained in importance but subtly changed. The emperors still recognized that their power derived from him but rather as from a state official, a colleague of higher rank, than from an almighty god. They more openly identified themselves with the supreme god. As a model they now chose the statue by the Greek presented as a Mercurius, dated by inscr ftions to the reign of Tiberius. Another confir marion! (2) A. Leibundgut —Majen has convincingly delonstrated that the alleged Trajan does not represent this emperor. Jdl 99 (1984) 257—289. 10
