BMCR 2009.03.35, Othmar Jaeggi, Die griechischen Portraets. Antike

Othmar Jaeggi, Die griechischen Portraets. Antike Repraesentation -
Moderne Projektion.  Berlin:  Dietrich Reimer Verlag, 2008.  Pp. 240.
ISBN 9783496013921.  EUR 39.00.

Reviewed by Eric M. Moormann, Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen, (The
Netherlands) ([email protected])
Word count:  1281 words
-------------------------------
To read a print-formatted version of this review, see
http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2009/2009-03-35.html
To comment on this review, see
http://www.bmcreview.org/2009/03/20090335.html
-------------------------------

On the cover of this interesting book, an antique portrait of Plato is
placed next to a reconstruction in flesh and blood. This person has
dark-blond hair, with some gray in it, and a straight beard. The broad
mouth has red lips and the eyes have blue irises. The couple of images
illustrate the subtitle of the book. One may question, however, whether
the man in the right image really could represent Plato: he rather
looks like a northerner, more specifically like a Mitteleuropaeer. Was
Plato a German?

This book is the result of a 2005-2006 Habilitationsschrift in Freiburg
im Breisgau (Germany), edited in a nice volume. The study has been
written in conjunction with an upcoming study on ancient portraits in a
private collection at Havana, a town many readers would not expect to
be so rich in antiquities! The question, 'what is a Greek portrait?',
put in chapter 1, cannot be answered easily, since we have neither the
ancient sitters nor their opinions about the bronze and marble faces
made of them. Antique portraits contain elements of genre (prince,
philosopher, citizen), realism vs. idealism and the like, which are
gathered in a system of tokens. For German readers, there is a
distinction between Bild (figural representation) and Bildnis (idem,
but of specific person). Individuality is lacking in some forms of
personal representation like funeral reliefs, where the message must be
that of a good citizen, soldier or the like. At the same time, I would
add, our photographic 'exactness', as we all know, is also biased by
factors of time, space and the eyes of photographer and beholder.

On the basis of this sketch of general preliminary problems, Jaeggi
develops some specific paths of research in the following eight
chapters. In chapter 2 the history of study on portraiture is tackled.
It is striking how many Germans and how few students from other
countries have been involved in the discussion of Greek portraits. From
the sketched discussion two 'positions' are either the outcome: (1)
ancient portraits are an interplay between a realistic rendering of a
person and abstract additions underlining specific qualities or (2)
they form sets of iconographic tokens that define a person in his or
her function (politician, military man) or qualities (wise or brave
man/woman In chapter 3 Jaeggi places himself within this tradition on
the basis of ancient philosophical texts (mainly Plato and Aristotle),
arguing that a portrait cannot express the sitter's psyche. Looking for
character in representations of sitters, consequently, is a modern
concept, influenced by psychology and even Christian theology (man as
effigies of God). Another bias is the Winckelmannian concept of
'idealism' still influencing modern discussion of portraits. Some
scholars strongly adhere to this idea of 'beautiful realism', to
paraphrase an expression of Bernhard Andreae (p. 49). Jaeggi's
conclusion is that (possibly) ideal and beautiful traits are
intermingled with other elements. As an example, he analyses the
well-known portraits of Themistocles and Pericles, transmitted in
various Roman copies: despite individual details they display
iconographic stereotypes of military leaders. The boxer's ear of the
Ostia Themistocles (fig. 8) is even defined as a failure of the
sculptor, with which Jaeggi simplifies the issue and puts a lot of
scholarly reasoning into the garbage bin (p. 58).

Chapter 4 explains Jaeggi's definition of a portrait as a means of
communicating a person's physical presence, including representation
and/or politics, as demanded by the commissioner. Although he does not
say so explicitly, the latter is not necessarily the sitter him- or
herself. When a portrait is a concoction of data, we must try to unpeel
the features and to define the semantic codes. In the following three
chapters, he tries to illustrate his thesis. Chapter 5 discusses
portraits of princes and the esthetics of youth, chapter 6 circles
around figures of thinkers and chapter 7 discusses women. Chapter 5
tackles the problem we saw in an immediate way: the 'ideal' form of
Polyclitus' Doryphoros and its variants became a fixed element in many
representations of rulers. As to the heads, short curly hair, deep-set
eyes, a broad chin and a small mouth with thick lips can be observed in
both mythical and historical figures. The comparison of a set of
profiles in fig. 33 illustrates the similarity of many rulers'
portraits. Other factors for recognizing specific dynasts are the wish
to resemble earlier rulers and/or gods. In sum, princes are portrayed
with a series of smaller and larger conventions in portraiture. In many
cases the individuality of the portrait would be established by an
inscription, now normally missing, as well as by the original location
of the sculpture.[[1]]

Chapter 6 focuses on the genre of Philosophenportraets, portraits of
persons who wanted to be associated with learnedness and intellectual
skills. Jaeggi demonstrates very clearly how this group, again, shows
repeating characteristics that can also be seen in heads of other
persons (Heracles, fig. 38) and genre figures like fishermen (the
famous so-called Seneca). Their individuality is less clear, when you
look at them from this point of view. When they are represented as
philosophers or literary authors, they show their pride and mature
individuality contrasted with the young heroic image of the rulers of
chapter 5.

The variation in male portraiture is much greater than in female
portraits that are highlighted in chapter 7.  Jaeggi observes general
characteristics like stance, dress, age, shape of head and facial
details that, like in the categories discussed previously produce
portraits that in our eyes lack really personal traits.[[2]] The
messages these women (or their commissioners) wanted to express were
gathered in these details. They had to be good wives (most portraits
indeed show mature women), good citizens and examples of virtue. The
iconography of citizens and princesses does not differ very much,
apparently since the messages they transmit are similar. As in the case
of their male counterparts, princesses are seldom individually
recognizable. The suggestion of identifying Cleopatra VII with the
Esquiline Venus (pp. 128-130) is an example of asking too much and of
the wish to interpret such a presumably peculiar figure as the portrait
of a peculiar personality. Attributes can define statuses of women;
nudity, an attribute of Aphrodite, pops up much more rarely than in the
case of men.

Chapter 8 concentrates on the development of style in Greek and
Hellenistic portraits. It is common knowledge that the chronology of
Hellenistic sculpture is imprecise because there are few securely dated
monuments. As we have seen, the method followed by Jaeggi makes clear
that portraits are defined by signs and that these signs are not
connected with specific moments. The estheticism asked for in
connection with the personality depicted determines the use of features
that were previously associated with chronology and fashion. Therefore,
these portraits are often of little help in establishing chronology.
Even coinage does not give sound clues for the interpretation and
dating of portrait sculpture. Nevertheless, Jaeggi offers a wide time
frame (pp. 147-150) in which esthetics are the guiding lines. In his
last chapter (9) he concludes that portrayal in the sense we are used
to is more or less absent in the Classical and Hellenistic world:
'portraits' express the qualities of a person rather than his physical
aspects. In that sense they strongly differ from Roman portraits, even
the idealized imperial heads. Jaeggi's study is highly provocative and
will be of great importance in future studies on portraits and other
sculpted objects, surely more for its prudence in assuming rules than
in the discussion of single pieces. His work is full of theoretical
approaches that may discourage the often too confident scholars who
want to see an antique celebrity in each beautiful head.


------------------
Notes:


1.   A similar very cautious strategy of recognising individual
Hellenistic rulers with great care, viz. those from Pergamon, can be
observed in H.U. Gans, Attalidische Herrscherbildnisse. Studien zur
hellenistischen Portraetplastik Pergamons, Wiesbaden 2006. This is in
contrast with the positivistic studies of F. Queyrel and others
mentioned with critical notes by Jaeggi n pp. 80-81.

2.   Two very popular types--the Large and the Small Herculanean
Women--have recently been discussed: J. Daehner (ed.), The Herculaneum
Women. History, Context, Identities, Los Angeles 2007. See A.
Allroggen-Bedel, BMCR 2008.09.20.