:<i>The Painted Tetrarchic Reliefs of Nicomedia: Uncovering the Colourful Life of Diocletian’s Forgotten Capital</i>

Previous articleNext article FreeBook ReviewThe Painted Tetrarchic Reliefs of Nicomedia: Uncovering the Colourful Life of Diocletian’s Forgotten Capital By Tuna S. Ağtürk (Studies in Classical Archaeology 12). Turnhout: Brepols 2021. Pp. 200. €85. ISBN 978-2-503-59478-1 (paper).Martin BeckmannMartin BeckmannMcMaster University Search for more articles by this author PDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmailQR Code SectionsMoreIn this book, the author catalogues, illustrates, and discusses a remarkable set of painted marble relief panels found in İzmit, Turkey (ancient Nicomedia). The frieze appears to date to the Tetrarchic period and depicts, among other things, two emperors embracing (subject of the author’s preliminary publication in the AJA, “A New Tetrarchic Relief from Nicomedia: Embracing Emperors,” 122.3, 2018, 411–26). The reliefs were originally part of the decoration of a monumental colonnaded facade inside a large and lavishly decorated structure that Ağtürk calls an “imperial complex” (fig. 1.19 gives a proposed reconstruction). The width of the structure is about 25 m and the exposed length 30 m; the full extent has not been excavated. Ağtürk states that these once made up a 50 m long frieze (3), but few of the surviving pieces are fully intact and many are merely fragments, making the original length uncertain. If relief panels decorated two levels of a colonnaded facade, the original structure may have incorporated much more than 50 m of relief sculpture. The relief panels are roughly a meter high, but this height varies and may be an indicator of display in different locations. The width of the relief panels varies from less than 1 m to as much as 4 m. Presumably, this aspect of their dimension was determined by their position in the architectural facade.Judging from the well-preserved paint on many of the fragments, Ağtürk concludes that this structure collapsed not long after its creation, perhaps in an earthquake that is documented in 358 CE (15). The reliefs were mostly found during rescue excavations over the last two decades (though some had been discovered earlier). Those that have their findspots documented were all found scattered on the floor of the structure, and none were found in situ, making their original disposition highly uncertain. Three large statues of Athena, Hercules, and Hygeia were also found in the ruins of the structure. The fact that so many pieces of the relief panels are missing suggests that the ruins of the structure were extensively quarried for stone in the past. There is no information about any finds such as ceramics or coins made in the rescue excavations.After discussing Nicomedia, the author summarizes the rescue excavations. Almost no documentation was available for finds made in the 2001 and 2009 excavations, and one relief element found in the 2009 excavation even made its way onto the international antiquities market. Between 2015 and 2018, Ağtürk participated in further excavations, which revealed 28 more panels or fragments. These are illustrated together in fig. 1.10. In the next chapter, Ağtürk discusses technical aspects of the reliefs. At least four of the frieze blocks are spolia from an earlier building, repurposed to furnish the raw material for relief sculpture. There is a great deal of variety in the finish of the carving, with some details like hair finely carved on some blocks but left rougher, to be finished with paint, on others. The author concludes that this indicates the work was done at high speed, even rushed, and that the paint may have been applied by the sculptors themselves (32, 36).The subject matter of the frieze is divided into three genres: the emperor and his deeds, mythology, and agonistic events, with a chapter dedicated to each of these themes. The various panels depicting the emperor (or in one case emperors) are the most novel and important. The emperor is distinguished by his very short hair and beard (consistent with portraits of the tetrarchs on their coinage) colored brownish-red with paint, by a dark reddish-purple cloak that no other figure on the frieze wears, and in some cases by his activities and interactions with other figures in the frieze. The most striking scene (cat. no. 16) is that of two emperors embracing, strongly reminiscent of the Venice tetrarchs. They are part of a larger scene, each having apparently just dismounted from a carriage and each accompanied by a figure of Victory. Also strongly reminiscent of the tetrarchy is a scene (cat. no. 14) of an emperor riding on a galloping horse, being crowned by Hercules who strides behind him. Another emperor is shown (cat. no. 20) in armor and accompanied by Victory with a garland, while another (cat. no. 10) charges into battle, with a fallen barbarian below him. The sixth more or less certain depiction of an emperor on the frieze (cat. no. 15) rides a horse toward the right, while looking back over his shoulder. This is an unusual, perhaps unparalleled, gesture for an emperor in Roman art. Ağtürk associates it with the scene of the emperor with Hercules (to which this emperor perhaps looks back, although there is no physical connection between the fragments) and thus identifies the emperors as Diocletian and Maximian. Ağtürk associates another panel (cat. no. 17), showing the Genius of the Roman People, Roma, and three men wearing the toga praetexta, with the depictions of the emperor (the edge-bands of the togas appear red, but Ağtürk notes that induced luminescence imaging suggests that they were blue). The inclusion in the category the emperor and his deeds of another scene (cat. no. 11), however, described as “Military March of the Immigrants in the Countryside,” appears less certain. The relief panel has an upper border, unlike any others in this group and could well be a hunting scene. There is a forest setting, one figure carries a quiver, and a horse, with its Roman rider standing by, is shown wounded (not, I think, tired) with blood issuing from its mouth.The two other main themes of the reliefs are more familiar in the figural friezes of Roman Asia Minor: mythology and agonistic scenes. Ağtürk is able to associate a frieze panel that has been in the Istanbul Archaeological Museum since 1957 with the Nicomedia complex. It shows Poseidon, a river god and perhaps the founding hero, Nicomedes. Another panel (cat. no. 25), found in the 2001 excavations, shows Medea in the act of murdering her children, grasping one by the hair and brandishing a knife as a snake-wielding Fury drives her on. The agonistic scenes include one with prizes and an inscription naming three of the games at Nicomedia: the Olympia, Deia, and Capitolia. Other scenes show athletes, judges, a circus race, actors, and even an elephant and its rider.A detailed catalogue completes the book. My only criticism concerns the illustrations. Although they are in color and are printed sharply, too often their scale does not correspond to their importance and too much space has been dedicated to repetitions of the same photographs and could have been better used for enlargements or details. For example, a photograph of the relief depicting the embracing emperors is depicted in its entirety three times in three different places (42, 54, 118) at about the same scale. A detail of the embracing pair is given on page 54, but it is barely larger than the image of the full frieze section shown on the same page. Why not a full-page enlargement of this important pair? And why not enlargements of other parts of the scene (apart from the heads, which are given in enlargements)? Compare this situation to the fact that 18 pages (163–80) are dedicated to blown-up full-color illustrations of frieze fragments, broken portions of limbs, and drapery, from which little can be learned.Despite this shortcoming, the book is a thorough publication of an important new discovery. The combination of imperial, mythological, and agonistic themes is unparalleled in the preserved sculptural reliefs of the Tetrarchic period, and their significance is enhanced by their exceptional state of preservation and their association with a monumental structure in a new imperial capital.Notes[email protected] Previous articleNext article DetailsFiguresReferencesCited by American Journal of Archaeology Volume 127, Number 1January 2023 The journal of the Archaeological Institute of America Views: 142Total views on this site Article DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1086/723197HistoryPublished online November 08, 2022 Copyright © 2023 by the Archaeological Institute of AmericaPDF download Crossref reports no articles citing this article.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.