pothos.org

Agesil

I rechon your spot on.... The first person i thought when I saw it was Augastus.

I wonder if any one knows if there are Lysipus Replicas out there. Ive seen some on the busts to buy. I know there is a replica of Alexander taming Bucephalus. But a Lysipus Replica would top my collection off.

Kenny

Call my Ignorance here. Could people Clarify the Alexander Bust in Istanbul. Is that one supposed to be Lysipuss. But whoever it was done by for me its Alexander.

kenny

jasonxx wrote:Call my Ignorance here. Could people Clarify the Alexander Bust in Istanbul. Is that one supposed to be Lysipuss. But whoever it was done by for me its Alexander.

kenny

Hi Kenny,

The Archaeological Museum in Istanbul actually has three busts of Alexander, and one full statue. I suspect that the one you're thinking of is the Pergamum Bust, which is, if I recall correctly, a Hellenistic copy of a Lysippus.

ATB

Isn't it better that we discuss more seriously?

I believed if you said this is statue of a Chinese emperor but not a Roman enemy!

At least someone says What the similarity between this statue and Augustus is!! I think it is not difficult to understand this is statue of a young man, whenas Augustus became emperor at abot the age of 40.


Coin of Augustus

agesilaos wrote:It does not look like Seleukos to me and the statue on the French site is either a modern attempt or a Roman copy the only certain portrait is the obverse of a tetradrachm though I cannot recall the reverse off hand possibly Boukephalos with horns?

There's another extant portrait, it seems. Andrew Stewart in his Faces of Power: Alexander's Image and Hellenistic Politics has a photograph (No. 142) of a "Colossal head of Seleukos I Nikator of Syria, from Esen Tepe (near Iskenderun, Turkey) Ca. 100 BC.

Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:Characteristics of bronze staute of Alexander, by Lysippos: http://archaeology.suite101.com/article ... _the_great

1. turn of the neck (leaning the head towards the right)
2. slightly parted lips
3. aspiring glance
4. the anastole (flip of the hair)

The colossal head of Seleukos has all the above attributes - not all that unusual, IMO, considering how the various Successors liked to emulate Alexander. There are also obvious differences - those that tell us immediately it is NOT Alexander - a somewhat squashed chin and a shorter distance between it and the mouth; a thicker, fleshier face and neck; a wider, almost cruel mouth.

Now, I'm not claiming that the Iranian bronze IS Seleukos but am merely pointing out that your list of attributes does not necessarily confirm that the newly discovered head is Alexander. Further to this, the damage and the condition of the bronze hide/disguise many of the features. One cannot say with confidence that the glance is "aspiring"; the lips in the photograph look to me to be pressed together rather than slightly parted; and the condition of the piece makes it impossible to tell if the head leans towards the right or not!

What troubles me most about the statement that the head is an original Lysippus is that (for me) it detracts from the true importance of the piece. It is a beautiful bronze in its own right and any surviving bronze work from the Seleucid period is a major find. Do the archaeologists who discovered the bronze believe they must claim it was made by Lysippus in order for it to be properly appreciated?

Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:Isn't it better that we discuss more seriously?

I believed if you said this is statue of a Chinese emperor but not a Roman enemy!

Say what?

Best regards,

Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:Isn't it better that we discuss more seriously?

Absolutely.

In the spirit of "more seriously", are you going to supply some evidence - if any at all - that this is an "original staue of Alexander, built by Lysippus"?

Thus far you have failed to establish, beyond doubt, that it is Alexander. Amyntoros' reply above echoes my own thoughts. Certainly there is no evidence of "slightly parted lips". Indeed, they look thin and rather mean to me.

Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:At least someone says What the similarity between this statue and Augustus is!! I think it is not difficult to understand this is statue of a young man, whenas Augustus became emperor at abot the age of 40.

Augustus did indeed adopt his imperial titles at a later age, but he was wielding power much earlier - and he wasn't one to have statues of him as an older gentleman made: every statue I've ever seen of him shows him as a young man.

ATB

With Reference to the Lysipos Statues as a whole. Its fairly well agreed that Alexander basically comisioned the guy and was his favourite.

Can we assume Alexander prefered Lysipuss because he did a real likeness to himself or a more favourable image.

Would Alexander have done an Oliver Cromwell warts and all? And its fair to say although Lysipos Statues bare the same features some look a little different. Most people Acknowledge the one of Head and shoulders of Alexander is most like Alexander. But to me its the one i least like. He looks old and relatively ugly. I guess we get bach to our own interpreattions of Alexander and heroes. And sometime we would maybe make a picture Statue etc fit our own images.

But theres one thing we can be sure if Lysipos is as close as can be. Then the Mosaic aint to close. But I guess the Mosaic is the laymans image of Alexander.

Kenny

This statue has been found near Eskandarabad ( http://www.traveljournals.net/explore/i ... rabad.html ) which means "built by Alexander" in Persian, as you probabely know, the largest and most valuable gold medallion of Alexander has been found in this region too.


Gold medallion of Alexander, Shahr-e-Kord Archaeological Museum

IMHO- this could be any of his Companions. Moreover- has it been prooved that this statue is from Alexander's reign? Or is it later- some Hellenistic art or even Roman period? Has some analysis been made?

Everyone but not Alexander, do you know the reason yourself? It seems you just want to be opposed!

As I said, it is believed to be built by Lysippos (390-310 BC).

The alleged twist in the neck does look more like damage to me and the hair is falling in a fringe not looping up in an anastole. As Marcus says Augustus continued to portray himself as a young man long after he was a senile delinquent, statues of him DO resemble your bronze, coin prtraits are somewhat lame at this period realism only coming with Nero and his Imperial realism.

I have no objection to statues of Alexander being found in Iran/Iraq, one would expect some, I just don't think this is one of them and certainly not a Lysippos, these claims seem to reflect a degree of wishful thinking that has dogged archaeology since Schliemann at least.

Another possibility would be Trajan whose Parthian war took him as far as Susa I think, it might be a relic of his short lived conquest.

Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:Everyone but not Alexander, do you know the reason yourself? It seems you just want to be opposed!

As I said, it is believed to be built by Lysippos (390-310 BC).

Quite the contrary, Cyrus. Members (including myself) who have posted in this thread don't want to be opposed but simply require a credible explanation as to why the archaeologists who discovered the bronze say that it is (a) Alexander and (b) made by Lysippos. Pothosians have already given their reasons as to why they remain unconvinced by your statements in support of both claims above and have asked you to supply further supporting evidence. This is a very reasonable request. Continuing to say it is believed to be built by Lysippos doesn't help. The question is WHY do they believe so? What is their basis for this belief, other than the statements you have already made in this thread?

Best regards,

agesilaos, What if I say the inscribed signature of Lysippos has been found on this statue?

Cyrus Shahmiri wrote:agesilaos, What if I say the inscribed signature of Lysippos has been found on this statue?

This could and this could not be a proof as well... This could be false as well.
Sorry, for me answering