DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.37251#0165
SALA DEGLI ORTI LAMIANI 10
i33
added to mark its co-existence with Jupiter. Against this theory it may
be urged that instances of the Genius of a god, though not unknown from
inscriptions! (W. F. Otto in Pauly-Wissowa, art. G<?722zz.y, p. 116/}.) are by
no means common and offer no precise paraliei. Helbig, who asks why
the Genius of Jupiter should be represented rather than Jupiter himself,
substitutes for Visconti's the theory that this is the Genius of an army or
a military division—a conjecture which finds some support in the coins
of Trajanus Decius v, p. 190 f., 39/62) inscribed to the genius of
the Illyrian army; these show the genius as a youth with drapery, possibly
in some specimens an aegis, covering the 1. arm and shoulder, and with
cornucopiae. It may perhaps be surmised that we have here an ideal repre-
sentation of the Genius of an Emperor, closely based on some current type
of Emperor statue. No Imperial attribute is commoner than the aegis, as
gems abundantly testify, and we find the motive of the aegis spread over
the 1. arm, as in the present statue, in a torso from the theatre of Fallerone
in Umbria, now in the Louvre (Arndt-Amelung, 816, cf. Visconti in 7?z2//.
x (1882), p. 177) and in a fragment in Madrid (Htibner, 123, Arndt-
Amelung, 1638-40 ; head antique but foreign to the statue) evidently be-
longing to statues of Emperors imitated from the Alexander with the aegis
which has lately been discussed afresh by Perdrizet (T1W72. ZUtZ, xxi
(1913), pp. 39-72). We may further compare a limestone statue with
aegis in Cairo, published by Edgar (y. Af. V. xxxiii (1913), pi. II) as the
portrait of a Ptolemy, though the features are too effaced for identification,
and the bronze statuette in Naples from Pompeii, wearing armour inlaid
with silver patterns (Helios in chariot riding over the recumbent Earth)
and the aegis on the 1. arm (GzzziA?, 8n=Inv. 3013; Clarac, 933,
2373 —p. 372, 3 R) formerly called Caligula, but evidently an ideal type
perhaps of an Emperor deified as Alexander—to whose portraits the
arrangement of the upspringing locks of hair offers a marked analogy.
Of the statue of Alexander with the aegis, the type may be recovered
from a number of statuettes of varying merit published by Perdrizet
(6?<r. H/. yzz/trrz). The type of Alexander Alyto^os is common on coins
and gems, e. g. the celebrated carnelian at Petrograd signed by Neisos,
surmised by Furtwangler to be Alexander, resembles in form the present
statue, (9^772772 ^72, pi. XXXIII, 11; the coins of Ptolemy Soter I, A*. T7A. C.
vii, pi. I, &c.
The aegis, itself a divine attribute, could be reasonably transferred to
the Genius to mark him as belonging not to the Emperor merely, but to
the Emperor as yTztz-si deified. To this theory it might however be
objected that the statue under discussion is an ideal figure, white the
Genius of the Emperor generally bears his features (cf. the G^z'zzy
X22^22Win the Vatican, Helbig% 304, and the Genius, supposed by Helbig,
/pc. cz'Z 2*72/62, to be that of Caracalla, on the Capitoline altar, W222720, 1^),
though Furtwangler has shown that as early as Augustus an idealized
representation of the Emperor's Genius appeared on gems (GU?72772<772, iii,
p. 318). Statuary representations of the various types of Genius have so
far been too little studied for any sure conclusions to have been arrived at,
! The inscriptions most to the point are Z. Z. iii. 4401, from Carnuntum
(Genius Iovis); C. Z. Z. ix. 3513 (Temple to Genius Iovis at Furfo, 58 B. C.);
C. Z. Z. xiii. 6464 with small figure holding cornucopiae and cup, and
wearing boots, seen within an rzgZZzz/g).
i33
added to mark its co-existence with Jupiter. Against this theory it may
be urged that instances of the Genius of a god, though not unknown from
inscriptions! (W. F. Otto in Pauly-Wissowa, art. G<?722zz.y, p. 116/}.) are by
no means common and offer no precise paraliei. Helbig, who asks why
the Genius of Jupiter should be represented rather than Jupiter himself,
substitutes for Visconti's the theory that this is the Genius of an army or
a military division—a conjecture which finds some support in the coins
of Trajanus Decius v, p. 190 f., 39/62) inscribed to the genius of
the Illyrian army; these show the genius as a youth with drapery, possibly
in some specimens an aegis, covering the 1. arm and shoulder, and with
cornucopiae. It may perhaps be surmised that we have here an ideal repre-
sentation of the Genius of an Emperor, closely based on some current type
of Emperor statue. No Imperial attribute is commoner than the aegis, as
gems abundantly testify, and we find the motive of the aegis spread over
the 1. arm, as in the present statue, in a torso from the theatre of Fallerone
in Umbria, now in the Louvre (Arndt-Amelung, 816, cf. Visconti in 7?z2//.
x (1882), p. 177) and in a fragment in Madrid (Htibner, 123, Arndt-
Amelung, 1638-40 ; head antique but foreign to the statue) evidently be-
longing to statues of Emperors imitated from the Alexander with the aegis
which has lately been discussed afresh by Perdrizet (T1W72. ZUtZ, xxi
(1913), pp. 39-72). We may further compare a limestone statue with
aegis in Cairo, published by Edgar (y. Af. V. xxxiii (1913), pi. II) as the
portrait of a Ptolemy, though the features are too effaced for identification,
and the bronze statuette in Naples from Pompeii, wearing armour inlaid
with silver patterns (Helios in chariot riding over the recumbent Earth)
and the aegis on the 1. arm (GzzziA?, 8n=Inv. 3013; Clarac, 933,
2373 —p. 372, 3 R) formerly called Caligula, but evidently an ideal type
perhaps of an Emperor deified as Alexander—to whose portraits the
arrangement of the upspringing locks of hair offers a marked analogy.
Of the statue of Alexander with the aegis, the type may be recovered
from a number of statuettes of varying merit published by Perdrizet
(6?<r. H/. yzz/trrz). The type of Alexander Alyto^os is common on coins
and gems, e. g. the celebrated carnelian at Petrograd signed by Neisos,
surmised by Furtwangler to be Alexander, resembles in form the present
statue, (9^772772 ^72, pi. XXXIII, 11; the coins of Ptolemy Soter I, A*. T7A. C.
vii, pi. I, &c.
The aegis, itself a divine attribute, could be reasonably transferred to
the Genius to mark him as belonging not to the Emperor merely, but to
the Emperor as yTztz-si deified. To this theory it might however be
objected that the statue under discussion is an ideal figure, white the
Genius of the Emperor generally bears his features (cf. the G^z'zzy
X22^22Win the Vatican, Helbig% 304, and the Genius, supposed by Helbig,
/pc. cz'Z 2*72/62, to be that of Caracalla, on the Capitoline altar, W222720, 1^),
though Furtwangler has shown that as early as Augustus an idealized
representation of the Emperor's Genius appeared on gems (GU?72772<772, iii,
p. 318). Statuary representations of the various types of Genius have so
far been too little studied for any sure conclusions to have been arrived at,
! The inscriptions most to the point are Z. Z. iii. 4401, from Carnuntum
(Genius Iovis); C. Z. Z. ix. 3513 (Temple to Genius Iovis at Furfo, 58 B. C.);
C. Z. Z. xiii. 6464 with small figure holding cornucopiae and cup, and
wearing boots, seen within an rzgZZzz/g).