DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.26359#0019
Mikolaj Budzanowski
ished, yet the degree of artistry varies with dif-
ferent parts of the statue. Several roughly indi-
cated details (left hand of the goddess or lions’
heads) contrast with the carefully rendered faces
of both the goddess and the child. The sculpture
was left uninscribed.
At first glance the composition looks simple
and unexceptional. Yet, the statue represents
several details of interest where the popular mo-
tif of Isis lactans is concemed. The goddess Isis
is represented in an age-old pose: seated, with
her child on her lap (pl. 4, fig. 1). She is tenderly
supporting the head of the Horus-child with her
left hand, while in her right hand she holds her
left breast. The garment fits the figure so closely
that the body appears to be almost naked - the
edge of the dress being merely indicated above
the ankles. Isis wears an elaborate crown com-
posed of a tripartite wig, covered with echeloned
stylised curls, then a cap of vulture wings and
finally cow’s homs encircling the solar disk with
sculptured sunbeams. Two frontal plaits are com-
posed of rectangular locks grouped in five verti-
cal lines, while in the back-plait they are arranged
in fourteen lines. Additionally, a single row of curls
is visible on the goddess’ forehead, below the
vulture-cap. From the same place the vulture-
head rises. No traces of the expected uraeus
wreath supporting cow’s homs are found.
Harpocrates is portrayed as a naked figure, with
his arms on the sides, right palm held up in a ver-
tical position, the left arranged horizontally (pl. 4,
fig. 2). Side-lock on the right and a single uraeus
coil adom his shaved head. Genitals and a navel
are indicated, as are the skin-folds on the thorax.
The two are sifting on the throne composed of five
parts: two striding lions with erected tails, the seat-
base, the back-rest in form of seven uraei and cone
of the throne (pl. 4, figs. 3,4 and pl. 5, fig. 1).
A stylistic analysis should enable us to place it
within a chronological framework, and then, to ex-
plain the introduction of the lions to this context.
The artist has focused his attention on the face
of Isis (pl. 5, fig. 2). In the frontal view it ap-
7 The problem of female statuary sculpture of the
Ptolemaic period has been studied by Dr Sabina AL-
BERSMEIER, who has kindly consented to my read-
ing her doctoral dissertation, Untersuchungen zu den
pears very heavy and plump, with prominent and
softly rounded cheeks. Generally, they dominate
the face with an artistic intensity. The eyes were
once inlaid, although nothing is preserved from
the original material. The whole space of the eye-
hole is contained within a circle drawn by the
eyebrow and the lower outline of the eyelid.
Upper eyelids cover outer eye-comers and high-
light the outline of gently slanting eyebrows. Other
characteristic features of the modelling are pro-
nounced bags under the eyes.
The nose is unnaturally flat, resembling a tri-
angle. Fine, thin-lipped mouth, slightly deepened
at the comers, is curved with a faint smile. The
longer one looks at the face, the more one has
the impression that something distinctly personal
is expressed in these features. The artist has
managed to convey the benignity and softness of
a goddess-mother there.
As we see, the facial features reveal a close
affinity with the portraiture of the Ptolemaic Pe-
riod - prominent, rounded cheeks and inlaid
eyes characterise both the female and male por-
traits of the period. One must be aware how-
ever that we have no statue of the period to
serve as a parallel. Well dated female heads from
the Ptolemaic Period are not numerous, a fact
which makes our stylistic research difficult.7
The canonical female face is that of Arsinoe II
in the Vatican collection.8 Here, we note typi-
cally rounded face with the characteristic “U-let-
ter” outline. It is an idealising likeness - the ex-
pression is dry, bland, the face itself endowed
with an etemal smile. Little is gained by compar-
ing these two heads in chronological terms. Still,
the comparison shows both similarities and
marked differences. We note an analogical
rounded appearance, but rendered in another
way. The proportions of Arisnoe’s II face are
comparable to those of Cracow-Isis, but the
modelling is definitely more linear and conven-
tional in the royal likeness. In our statue the artist
has imbued the face with inner-life. Still, the mod-
elling is much simpler here, traditional cosmetic
Frauenstatuen des ptolemeischen Ägypten (Diss.
Trier 1998, forthcoming in print next year).
8 WILDUNG, SCHOSKE (ed.), Kleopatra, fig. 19.
16
ished, yet the degree of artistry varies with dif-
ferent parts of the statue. Several roughly indi-
cated details (left hand of the goddess or lions’
heads) contrast with the carefully rendered faces
of both the goddess and the child. The sculpture
was left uninscribed.
At first glance the composition looks simple
and unexceptional. Yet, the statue represents
several details of interest where the popular mo-
tif of Isis lactans is concemed. The goddess Isis
is represented in an age-old pose: seated, with
her child on her lap (pl. 4, fig. 1). She is tenderly
supporting the head of the Horus-child with her
left hand, while in her right hand she holds her
left breast. The garment fits the figure so closely
that the body appears to be almost naked - the
edge of the dress being merely indicated above
the ankles. Isis wears an elaborate crown com-
posed of a tripartite wig, covered with echeloned
stylised curls, then a cap of vulture wings and
finally cow’s homs encircling the solar disk with
sculptured sunbeams. Two frontal plaits are com-
posed of rectangular locks grouped in five verti-
cal lines, while in the back-plait they are arranged
in fourteen lines. Additionally, a single row of curls
is visible on the goddess’ forehead, below the
vulture-cap. From the same place the vulture-
head rises. No traces of the expected uraeus
wreath supporting cow’s homs are found.
Harpocrates is portrayed as a naked figure, with
his arms on the sides, right palm held up in a ver-
tical position, the left arranged horizontally (pl. 4,
fig. 2). Side-lock on the right and a single uraeus
coil adom his shaved head. Genitals and a navel
are indicated, as are the skin-folds on the thorax.
The two are sifting on the throne composed of five
parts: two striding lions with erected tails, the seat-
base, the back-rest in form of seven uraei and cone
of the throne (pl. 4, figs. 3,4 and pl. 5, fig. 1).
A stylistic analysis should enable us to place it
within a chronological framework, and then, to ex-
plain the introduction of the lions to this context.
The artist has focused his attention on the face
of Isis (pl. 5, fig. 2). In the frontal view it ap-
7 The problem of female statuary sculpture of the
Ptolemaic period has been studied by Dr Sabina AL-
BERSMEIER, who has kindly consented to my read-
ing her doctoral dissertation, Untersuchungen zu den
pears very heavy and plump, with prominent and
softly rounded cheeks. Generally, they dominate
the face with an artistic intensity. The eyes were
once inlaid, although nothing is preserved from
the original material. The whole space of the eye-
hole is contained within a circle drawn by the
eyebrow and the lower outline of the eyelid.
Upper eyelids cover outer eye-comers and high-
light the outline of gently slanting eyebrows. Other
characteristic features of the modelling are pro-
nounced bags under the eyes.
The nose is unnaturally flat, resembling a tri-
angle. Fine, thin-lipped mouth, slightly deepened
at the comers, is curved with a faint smile. The
longer one looks at the face, the more one has
the impression that something distinctly personal
is expressed in these features. The artist has
managed to convey the benignity and softness of
a goddess-mother there.
As we see, the facial features reveal a close
affinity with the portraiture of the Ptolemaic Pe-
riod - prominent, rounded cheeks and inlaid
eyes characterise both the female and male por-
traits of the period. One must be aware how-
ever that we have no statue of the period to
serve as a parallel. Well dated female heads from
the Ptolemaic Period are not numerous, a fact
which makes our stylistic research difficult.7
The canonical female face is that of Arsinoe II
in the Vatican collection.8 Here, we note typi-
cally rounded face with the characteristic “U-let-
ter” outline. It is an idealising likeness - the ex-
pression is dry, bland, the face itself endowed
with an etemal smile. Little is gained by compar-
ing these two heads in chronological terms. Still,
the comparison shows both similarities and
marked differences. We note an analogical
rounded appearance, but rendered in another
way. The proportions of Arisnoe’s II face are
comparable to those of Cracow-Isis, but the
modelling is definitely more linear and conven-
tional in the royal likeness. In our statue the artist
has imbued the face with inner-life. Still, the mod-
elling is much simpler here, traditional cosmetic
Frauenstatuen des ptolemeischen Ägypten (Diss.
Trier 1998, forthcoming in print next year).
8 WILDUNG, SCHOSKE (ed.), Kleopatra, fig. 19.
16