attribute of this type of figure. The head is turned rather sharply to the right, and the gaze follows the general direction indicated by the right arm; the eyes appear to be focused on a point at some little distance, but their expression is not of great intensity. The ears are rather prominent and, as usual in this type of veiled head, appear to be pushed forward by the edge of the veil which passes just behind them.2

The head and face were found in three separate pieces the largest of which comprises the neck with the back and top of the head, the left ear with the hair just above it, and the folds of the of head are almost exactly similar to the Corinthian Augustus; the drapery is also very like, though more voluminous and lacking the remarkable loop or sinus at the right knee (cf. our Pl. V). 2. Augustus veiled, in Royal Museum, Madrid. Cf. Reinach, Rep. de la Stat. Grecque et Romaine, I, p. 563, pl. 916 A, No. 2337 A; Hübner, Antike Bildw. zu Madrid, No. 78; Bernoulli, op. cit. II, 1, p. 39, No. 63. Here also the pose is very similar, but the drapery much freer and more voluminous. 3. Augustus veiled, in Borghese Museum, Rome. Cf. Reinach, op. cit. II, p. 578, No. 8; Nibby, Mon. Borgh. pl. 10; Bernoulli, op. cit. II, p. 32, No. 25; Helbig, Führer, No. 896 (edit. 1891). Here the position of the legs is reversed, but the treatment of the drapery and the pose of arms and head are almost identical with the Corinthian Augustus; the sinus, however, does not fall so sharply, and extends only to the right knee and not below it.

1 Cf. Daremberg et Saglio, op. cit. s.v. patera,—“It is often put in the hands of magistrates, emperors, and divinities themselves." See also s.v. sacrificium, fig. 6004, a Roman coin on which is a male figure in a toga, head veiled, pouring a libation from a patera in the right hand upon a flaming altar. Cf. also Augustus as Pontifex Maximus in Vatican, Overbeck, op. cit. II, fig. 234 g; also Duruy, op. cit. III, p. 725. Of this statue Helbig, op. cit. No. 319, remarks: "Left hand and right forearm with patera restored. The toga pulled up over the back of the head indicates that he was represented as sacrificing, probably with reference to his position as Pontifex Maximus, and that the restoration of the patera in the right hand is thus correct." Cf. also Reinach, op. cit., I, p. 451, pl. 768 B. No. 1909; I, p. 579, pl. 940 A, No. 2398 B; I, p. 583, pl. 945, No. 2422; II, p. 578, No. 8.

2 Cf. for this trait the portrait head of Tiberius at Corinth (to be published as the second paper of the present series); also the following works: Statues of Augustus as Pontifex Maximus, e.g. 1. In Royal Museum, Madrid. Cf. Reinach, op. cit. I, p. 563, pl. 916 A, No. 2337 A; Hübner, op. cit. No. 78; Bernoulli, op. cit. II, 1, p. 39, No. 63, "mit abstehenden Ohren." 2. In Borghese Museum, Rome. Cf. Reinach, op. cit. II, p. 578, No. 8; Nibby, Mon. Borgh. pl. 10; Bernoulli, op. cit. II, 1, p. 32, No. 25; also Helbig, op. cit. No. 896. Draped figures in the same pose, e.g. 1. In Royal Museum, Turin: "prêtre voilé," Reinach, op. cit. I, p. 451, pl. 768 B, No. 1907 A. 2. In Aquileia. Cf. Reinach, op. cit. II, p. 579, No. 7; Bernoulli, op. cit. II, 1, p. 154, No. 55; Leipziger Illus. Zeit. Feb. 1884, p. 136.

veil down the left side. The face, front of head, and right ear form a second fragment which was not found until a day or so after the body appeared. The violence with which the statue was thrown down had caused the stone to split neatly along the line of the mica-flaw above mentioned, and had sent the face sliding a meter or two northward amidst the debris. Nevertheless the face shows scarcely a scratch (cf. PLATES VI and VII). The third fragment is a fold of veil which extends between the right shoulder and neck.

When the statue was first brought to light the hair still preserved numerous traces of a flat wash of color a deep red in tone; upon the surface of the eyeballs the painted outline of iris and pupil could also be clearly traced, and the lips were still enlivened with a transparent reddish tinge. It seems probable that, in its original condition, the red pigment of the hair served merely as an under-coating or sizing upon which gilding was applied, a conclusion strengthened by the notice of Suetonius (Div. Augustus, 79) to the effect that the hair of Augustus was naturally of a yellowish tinge, capillum subflavum.2 At all events the total effect of the coloring was astoundingly life-like and far from displeasing to the eye; unfortunately, however, the color faded rapidly upon exposure to the air. In general the statue shows but slight traces of atmospheric weathering, and hence must have stood under cover; it is somewhat marked with ground and root stains. The drapery though dignified is rather heavy and is finished with no great care. The rear of the figure is very sum

1

1 Polychromy in Roman sculpture; cf. the following: Boeckler, 'Die Polychromie in der antiken Sculptur', Jahresbericht der Realschule zu Aschersleben, 1882; He gives a résumé of the literary sources and supplements it by a description of ancient sculptures showing traces of polychromy, mentioning several works of the Roman period, none of which, however, are portraits. R. Delbrück, Bildnisse Römischer Kaiser, p. 4; 'Zum Schluss sei bemerkt dass die Porträts der Kaiserzeit polychrom waren, mit hellen oder dunklen Haaren und Brauen, farbigen Augen, roten Lippen, ähnlich wie auf den Mosaiken, z.b. von Justinian I und Theodora in San Vitale zu Ravenna, taf. XLIII, XLIV. Davon sind freilich höchstens Spuren da.' Cf. also taf. VI, and Delbrück, Antike Porträts, taf. 34. H. Blümner, Technische Probleme aus Kunst und Handwerk der Alten, Berlin 1877, p. 10; He gives a general bibliography on the subject, extending from 1826 to 1872.

2 Cf. also Boeckler, op. cit., who mentions an archaistic Diana from Herculaneum, now in the Naples Museum, reproduced in color in Walz, Ueber die Polychromie der antiken Sculptur, taf. I, No. 1. He says 'Das Haar ist von einer rötlichen Farbe und scheint ursprünglich vergoldet gewesen zu sein.'

marily treated, simply blocked out without detail of drapery or finish of surface, a fact which indicates that the statue was to be set up against a wall or within a niche and at a level well above the eye of the spectator.1

In the matter of technique several points are worthy of notice. First, the drill was used rather freely in working the deeper folds of drapery, and more particularly where undercutting was necessary as, for instance, between the veil and the sides of the neck, and on the crown of the head between the front edge of the hood and the hair just beneath it (PLATES V and VI); in positions of this sort little care was taken to obscure the traces of drilling. On the flesh surfaces, however, the instrument was used much more carefully, yet slight traces are discernible inside the nostrils, at the inner corners of the eyes, inside the ears, and at the corners of the mouth. The flesh surfaces are smoothly worked but unpolished, and upon close examination show clear marks of tooling, both with the fine-point and the fine-tooth chisel. The modelling of the face is firm though somewhat lacking in subtlety of finish, and seems to have been deliberately conventionalized; it lacks entirely that individuality and force of character which appears so strikingly in the Augustus of the Vatican from Prima Porta.2 The hair across the forehead is freely and thickly worked, yet here also a certain conventionalism is apparent in the treatment of the individual locks which is quite in keeping with the general character of the portrait. The gaze, which is directed slightly downward and to the right, lacks concentration and purpose due largely to the fact that the eyes are not opened to their full extent, but more directly to the flat and impressionistic treatment of the eyeball. The lids are clearly worked and are given considerable relief even at the outer corners. A point worthy of notice is that the eyes are not deep-set as in the majority of portraits of Augustus, and yet, due to the flattening of the eyeballs and to the roll of flesh beneath the brows at the outer corners, an effect of depth

1 Cf. our Pl. VII. The Augustus of Prima Porta was treated in this same manner, according to Bernoulli, op. cit. II, 1, p. 27.

2 Cf. Brunn-Bruckmann, Denkmäler, taf. 225.

3 Cf. Pls. VI and VII. This in general is characteristic of the period, although the slight hollowing of the pupils which became common in the time of Hadrian appears also in the Augustan period, e.g., in the Augustus of Prima Porta, cf. Bernoulli, op. cit. II, 1, taf. I; and in the Berlin Tiberius, cf. Furtwängler, Die Sammlung Sabouroff, taf. XLIII; also Brunn und Arndt, Gr. und röm. Porträts, taf. 19-20.

is produced without at the same time any great individualization. The brows themselves though straight and well marked are rather generalized in treatment as is also the characteristic Augustan frown between the eyes. The same may be said of the mouth and nose, though the former does not lack a certain delicacy and strength. To my mind the work may be briefly summarized as follows: First, its most striking characteristic is the strict conformity to an apparently well-established type. Second, realism is not attempted or desired,-in fact the portrait is generalized, consciously academic in treatment, and seems clearly the work of a man who had had no opportunity of studying his subject at first hand, in spite of the fact that iconographic details are meticulously represented (vide infra). Finally, in marked contradistinction to the majority of contemporary works done at Rome there is here displayed that persistently Greek trait of idealization which presents to us Augustus, not as he was in life, but as the visible embodiment of the benignity and moderation of the Roman rule.

Thus far I have assumed that we had to do with a portrait of Augustus. Although this assumption could scarcely be challenged by anyone familiar with the Augustus type in sculpture it is nevertheless advisable to review briefly the iconographic criteria which prove the attribution.

The Augustan physiognomy, once seen and studied in a portrait such as that from Prima Porta or the bust in Munich,1 is never forgotten; the features, clear cut, refined, powerful, are indelibly impressed on the memory, and one feels instinctively that here, indeed, was a man worthy to be the founder of the Roman Empire. Though comparatively few of the extant portraits appeal to the observer with the compelling authority of the masterpieces just mentioned, and all show great diversity both in conception and treatment, there are certain outstanding characteristics which may fairly be taken to represent the features of Augustus as they were in the flesh. These are a broad forehead with massive flatly arched skull, brows clear cut, angular, and drawn together in a slight frown between the eyes, nose slightly aquiline, its profile drawn in slightly both above and below the bridge,33 a nobly and delicately formed mouth, a regularly 1 Brunn-Bruckmann, op. cit. pl. 45.

"supercilia coniuncta."

Cf. Suetonius, Div. Aug. 79, Cf. Suetonius, loc. cit. ". nasum et a summo eminentiorem et ab imo deductiorem."

modelled, deeply grooved chin coming forward to the perpendicular plane of the lips, thin cheeks, ears slightly projecting,' hair abundant and curling2 and arranged across the forehead and before the ears in gracefully curved locks which, in spite of their rather negligent and apparently fortuitous disposition, nevertheless recur in a scheme which remains practically unchanged throughout the whole series of Augustan portraits. The general expression is serious, somewhat cold, perhaps, but often, when relieved by a gesture or a turn of the head, is imperious and majestic.

A glance at PLATES V, VI, and VII will satisfy the reader that this description is applicable almost word for word to the Corinthian Augustus. Yet two objections may be urged, the first and most important of which is that the nose of the Corinthian head is obviously not aquiline; in fact, when seen in profile (PLATE VII) it appears almost straight, the indentations above and below the bridge being scarcely perceptible. Analogies are to be found for this, however, in several well authenticated portraits. The second objection-of minor importance is the comparative fullness of the cheeks and the general softening of the lower part of the face, a treatment which while detracting somewhat from the individuality of the portrait is clearly idealistic in purpose. It is this, of course, which explains the classic line of the nose, and here we see carried almost to excess that tendency to soften and idealize which is the most outstanding characteristic of the portrait as a whole. Any lingering doubt as to the authenticity of the work is finally resolved by a study of the arrangement of the hair. As already indicated, this one trait furnishes, perhaps, the most trustworthy criterion of identification throughout the whole series of portraits of Augustus; in fact it often 1 Cf. Suetonius, loc. cit. "mediocres aures."

2 Cf. Suetonius, loc. cit. "capillum leviter inflexum et subflavum.”

3 Cf. Suetonius, loc. cit.

"quamquam et omnis lenocinii neglegens et in capite comendo tam incuriosus, ut raptim compluribus simul tonsoribus operam daret."

4 Cf. Suetonius, loc. cit. tranquillo serenoque.

"Vultu erat vel in sermone vel tacitus Oculos habuit claros ac nitidos, quibus

etiam existimari volebat inesse quiddam divini vigoris, gaudebatque, si qui sibi acrius contuenti quasi ad fulgorem solis vultum summitteret."-The foregoing description is drawn largely from Bernoulli, op. cit. II, 1, pp. 55–56.

5

E.g., nude statue in Vatican, Bernoulli, op. cit. II, 1, p. 29, No. 13, pl. III; toga-clad statue in Vatican, Bernoulli, op. cit. II, 1, p. 31, No. 18, "Der Nasenrücken ist von gleichmässiger Breite, im Profil unmerklich gebogen.”