Azara herm

[jona]

Among the treasures of the Louvre museum in Paris is the so-called Azara herm (http://www.beazley.ox.ac.uk/CGPrograms/ ... e/C151.jpg ), a portrait of Alexander.It is said to be the only portrait that was certainly made during his life; in fact, it has been claimed to be the only portrait (as far as we know) that Alexander has really seen."It is said" and "it has been claimed": does anybody know who made these claims?Jona

[beausefaless]

Jona,Personally I'm skeptical on the validity of the who or the whoever of these claims. It appears to be of Roman origin to me but that's just my opinion. Maybe I'll have something to learn on this thread, thanks.Regards, Andrew

[beausefaless]

I should further explain my view :
As an ancient coin collector of Alexanders, most of these coin collectors feel the Lysimachos tetradrachm (323-281 BCE, some people claim) are the closest portrait of ATG. In which I also have some reservations due to some other lifetime tetradrachms,for example, Pella, Anphibolis, Tarsos, Egypt, mint of Alexandria, and Babylon mints.
Take care,
Andrew

[abm]

i don't know who made these claims and unfortunately i have no time to check it now, but you might find something in A. STEWART, Faces of Power. AlexanderGÇÖs Image and Hellenistic Politics (Hellenistic Culture and Society 11), Berkeley GÇô Los Angeles GÇô Oxford 1993, passim, who discusses it (see index s.v. Paris, Louvre: Azara-Alexander).kind regards

[jona]

Thanks / dank u wel!Jona

[amyntoros]

There's also this in Margaret BeiberGÇÖs Alexander the Great in Greek and Roman Art(1964) In the introduction she compares various heads, including the Azara Herm, the Neison gem, and the coins issued later by Ptolemy I and Lysimachus which all have similarly straight hair. Later, she quotes Plutarch on Lysippos and then says, regarding the herm: (a Roman copy of a presumed original of Lysippos):GÇ£The turn of the neck and the hair standing up over the forehead like a lionGÇÖs mane (anastole) are distinctly recognizable in the Azara herm. There is a noticeable difference in the two sides of the face, and a certain Lysippean nervous play in the muscles and the hair are still recognizable, in spite of the fact that the herm is in a bad state of preservation. We must imagine the original as being much more delicately modeled, so as to bring out the small individual traits more accurately and with more feeling, and to express not only the character but also the mood of the great conqueror.There can be no doubt that the head of his herm is a Roman copy of that of the most celebrated statue by Lysippos, the Alexander with the spear of which Plutarch says: When Lysippos had finished the first statue of Alexander looking up with his face to the sky (as Alexander was wont to look, with his neck slightly bent) he not improperly added to the pedestal the following lines: GÇÿThe statue seems to look to Zeus and say, take thou Olympus; me let earth obey.GÇÖFortunately there is a bronze statuette that agrees with this description and has the same long-shaped head and meager features as the Azara herm. It is the statuette in the Louvre, found in lower Egypt. The head is turned sharply to his right, the left of the spectator; the neck is stretched and at the same time bent to his left, exactly as described in the literary evidence. The left arm is stretched out horizontally and probably held the spear, while the right hand points to the earth which Alexander had subdued by means of his spear, as expressed in the epigram. The statuette reflects the life and free movement characteristics of the works of Lysippos and it is easy to imagine the lively impression of motion in the famous original statue from which it was taken.This statuette is an early Hellenistic adaptation or reflection of the original, and the fact that it was found in Egypt points to the possibility that Lysippos has created the original for the city of Alexandria, founded by Alexander in 332.

[amyntoros]

It has nothing of that tendency toward deification which began with Alexander's adoption by Zeus Ammon, and the literary evidence plainly indicates that Lysippos in the original was contrasting Alexander with Zeus, representing him as the conqueror proud of his own manly, not divine powers. The date of the original, therefore, must be before the year 330. This has been denied, however, on the ground that in the Azara herm Alexander appears to be about thirty years old, which would date the statue in 326 B.C. and that in this late period Lysippos could not have seen Alexander because he was then in India. But there is no reason why Lysippos should not have followed him to the East as other artists did. According to Plutarch, many artists were summoned from Greece to Ecbatana. Probably Alexander's court sculptor was among them or had preceded them, and the statue of the great conqueror may well have been commissioned for the newly-founded city of Alexandria. As to Alexander's age, active military leaders age more quickly than ordinary men and he may well have been only twenty five when the statue was made. Furthermore, he does not appear younger in the mosaic which represents him in the battle of Issos, 333 B.C. and therefore only twenty-three years old."So, it does look like Margarete Beiber belongs under any list of "It is said" and "it has been claimed".:-)Linda Ann

[jona]

Thanks. You must have copied no less than two pages from the book, just to help me - thanks, thanks, thanks.Jona

[beausefaless]

Thank you all, I appreciate the lesson!All the best, Andrew

[beausefaless]

Hi Amyntoros,I must differ with Margaret BeiberGÇÖs Alexander the Great in Greek and Roman Art(1964). Would you be kind enough to tell me where I can see a Lysimachus tetradrachm with straight hair for the coins I have and have seen by no means have straight hair. Thanks for your time.Regards, Andrew

[xxx]

Just a couple fo quick notes on the Azara herm - most scholars consider it the best likeness of Alexander because the features are not as exaggerated. It also holds the distinction of being the only statue with his name carved in it. We assume from Alexander's features as listed in the histories, the head tilt, the large eyes and the anastole as identifying this particular king and therefore we look at a statue and place it as an Alexander because it has these features. There is quite a variation in what the statues all look like, hence his actual appearance remains a mystery despite the fact he is quite well represented in art. The Azara is thought, emphasis on 'thought' to be taken from a statue by Lysippus, notably because of the elongated facial features - Lysippos liked to elongate things, and in Alexander's case, it would make him also appear taller. As is clear from the coins, Alexander had a very short forehead and a big nose and this elongation balances off his face. Because Lysippos worked in bronze, it also niftily concealed Alexander's fair skin which in his time was considered a feminine trait as was his long neck, large eyes, thick lips, etc. For myself I would suggest the Stag Hunt mosaic and the Abukir Medallion as being a pretty good reprsentation of what the King looked like. The coins of Lysimachus are thought to have been done by Alexander's gem carver due to their fine quality. For the best review of Alexander Art, see Faces of Power by Andrew Stewart. It is by far the best book out there.

[amyntoros]

Hi Andrew:(I should first just mention that the information I quoted from Beiber's book is from Chapter 1, and not the introduction - my mistake.) Bieber does refer to photographs when she mentions the straight hair, and the three coins issued by Ptolemy all show Alexander wearing the elephant head, so the hair is barely visible. It does however, fall in fairly straight or slight waves upon his cheeks. On the other hand, the Lysimachus coin shows Alexander wearing the rams horns and a considerable amount of definitely wavy hair. I think it might be a matter of interpretation as to her use of the word "straight", i.e., fairly long, wavy tendrils, as opposed to tight curls. On close inspection of the photos of the Issus mosaic, I can see some resemblence between the hair on the mosaic and the Lysimachus coin. On the other hand, the Alexander Sarcophagus shows Alexander with short and very tight curls - quite a difference. When you think about it, it would be quite difficult to portray completely straight hair on a coin, not to mention that it would be less aesthetically pleasing. The coin is listed as "Coin issued by Lysimachus as King of Thrace (306-281 B.C.). Lange, op cit." and there's no museum listed, as with other coins. But this is all Bieber's opinion. My favorite portrayals of Alexander and the ones I personally prefer to believe are the truest likeness are the little "Alexander as Pan" figure from Pella and the Pergamon head, which look like young and older versions of the same man. Though I have to say that both of them show "comparatively: straight hair again. :-)Best regards,Linda Ann

[amyntoros]

You're more than welcome. You've certainly typed up plenty of information yourself for this forum.