Missing Antiquities of Albania
   ICAA    SEARCH THE SITE FOR MISSING ANTIQUITIES

   
   
   
   
   
   



CATALOGUE OF MISSING ANTIQUITIES

STATUE IN THE TYPE OF THE LARGE HERCULANEUM WOMAN

  Identification
   
Name
Statue in the type of the Large Herculaneum Woman
   
Original museum location and inventory no.
Butrint Archaeological Museum, Inv. 584
   
Materials
Fine-grained white marble
   
Dimensions
207 cm high; head is 18.2 cm high
   
Excavation context
Found during Ugolini’s 1929 excavations of the theatre, in front of the scaenae frons.
   
Bibliography
Ugolini, L.M. (1935) Nuove scoperte della Missione Archeologica Italiana in Albania - La grande Ercolanese. Bollettino d’Arte del Ministero dell’Educazione Nazionale 2, August. Rome.
Ugolini, L.M. (1935) Il teatro di Butrinto. Atti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia. Rendiconti 11: 81.
Ugolini, L.M. (1937) Butrinto, il mito di Enea. Gli scavi: 84; fig. 137. Rome.
Budina, D. (1971) Harta arkeologjike e bregdetit Jon dhe pellgut të Delvinës. Iliria I: 333; pl. 38.
Bergemann, J. (1998) Die Römische Kolonie von Butrint und die Romanisierung Griechenlands: 135-137; figs 78, 80a-b. Munich.
Gilkes, O. (2003) (ed.) The Theatre at Butrint: Luigi Maria Ugolini’s Excavations at Butrint 1928-1932 (Albania Antica IV, Supl. vol. 35): 194, 241; figs 8.6-8.10. London.
   
Description (inc. icon. study, comparison with similar objects, production context)

The veiled woman is standing in a relaxed pose with her head slightly turned to her left. The weight of her body is mainly on her right leg, with the left lightly flexed at the knee and only the slightest sway of her hips. Her sandalled feet are almost entirely covered by her long dress (chiton?). She wears a voluminous mantle that envelops her from her shoulders to below her knees. With her right arm - raised to the height of her chest - she draws a fold of the mantle diagonally across her chest in a manner characteristic of the type. Her left arm hangs down by her side, the hand partially hidden under the cloth. The veil covers the back of her head, revealing the hair to be in melonen-frisur style. Wavy strands of hair frame her oval face at the hairline; on her forehead are two antithetical curls on either side of the centre parting - as in the portrait of the Roman matron (Inv. 535). Her features are clear and calm with slightly lowered eyes with thick eyelids, a long nose and a small mouth with fairly fleshy lips. Iconographically, the statue appears very similar to the eponymous version in Dresden.[1] Though found separately, the head and body were carved from a single block of marble, apart from the very top of the head, which was attached separately. [2] The type is one of the most common for honorific representations of women in the Roman east; indicating a value-set of shared cultural roots, social standing and appropriate female virtues. [3] See also the headless statue of a draped woman. Though the face is not formally a portrait the figure should be interpreted within a civic context and not as a deity.

   
Dating
The style of working is comparable to that of the head of Livia and the statue of a draped woman, suggesting a date of the first half of the first century AD. [4]
   
History of Disappearance
The body was sent to Italy in 1940 for the Mostra d’Oltremare in Naples and is still unaccounted for. Upper part of head, which was carved separately, is missing. The head was stolen from the Butrint Archaeological Museum on 25 February 1991, but subsequently returned in July.
   
Last Known State of Conservation
Face and top of head missing from the statue; drapery folds worn.
   
Notes
1. Bieber, M. (1977) Ancient Copies: 153; figs 664-667. Princeton.
2. Gilkes 2003: 201, 207.
3. Davies, G. (2002) Clothes as sign. The case of the Large and Small Herculaneum Women. In L. Llewellin-Jones (ed.), Women’s Dress in the Ancient Greek World: 227-241. London. Trimble, J. (2000) Replicating the body politic: the Herculaneum women statue types in early Imperial Italy. Journal of Roman Archaeology 13: 41-68.
4. Cf. Bergemann (1998: 135) who dates the statue to the Augustan period.