No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Siege scene on the gold amphora of the Panagjurischte Treasure
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2013
Extract
The remarkable Treasure, found on December 8, 1949, near the railway station of Panagjurischte, about 40 km north-west of Plovdiv (Bulgaria) on the fringe of a site where traces of earlier settlements had been observed, has attracted less attention in Western periodicals than its interest and importance deserve. I have had two opportunities of viewing the Treasure (in 1968 and 1972) in the Museum at Plovdiv. It is well displayed, but security arrangements are (very properly) such that it would be unreasonable to ask to handle the objects. Fortunately photographs are available giving accurate information on details, though these inevitably fail to reflect the overwhelming impression produced on the spectator by the find as a whole (plate 1a).
Date and Place of Manufacture
Metrological and epigraphical considerations conspire to date the find to the closing years of the fourth century B.C. (or possibly soon after the turn of the century) and suggest North-West Asia Minor as the place of origin. The total weight of the nine pieces is 6·172 kg of high-quality gold. Except for minor damage to two rhytons, all is excellently preserved; some small jewels which served for details such as eyeballs have been lost, but hardly anything is dented. Considered as bullion, this amount of gold is equivalent within 4 g to 730 darics (at 8·45 g) or to 1430 Attic drachmas (at 4·31 g), within 9 g. Since the phiale (plate IIId) scales 845·7 g, the figures neatly inscribed on the outside below the rim in small acrophonic numerals between 3—4 mm high (plate Ib) advertise its weight in terms of both these standards: these are H (=100, sc. darics) and ΗΓΔΔΔΔΙΙΙ, plus an indeterminate fraction, i.e. something over 196 Attic drachmas.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies 1974
References
1 I dislike the word ‘Treasure’ in connexion with an archaeological find, for obvious reasons. It is however firmly established in popular usage, so one must acquiesce in it under protest.
2 In preparing this study I have relied principally on the following:
Conçev, D. in Svoboda—Conçev, Neue Denkmäler antiker Toreutik, II, Prague, 1956, pp. 118–64Google Scholar.
Id. (=D. Tsontschev, ), Der Goldschatz von Panagjurischte, Berlin, 1959Google Scholar.
Hoffmann, H., Mitteilungen des deutschen archäologischen Instituts (röm. Abteilung) LXV (1958), 121 fGoogle Scholar.
Simon, E., Antike Kunst III (1960) pp. 1 fGoogle Scholar., and H. A. Kahn's note, ibid. p. 27 f. (See too Antike Kunst VII (1964) pp. 30–40.)
Venedikov, I., The Panagjurischte Gold Treasure, Sofia, 1961Google Scholar.
A number of the illustrations to this article are taken from one or another of these works, and I am grateful to the publishers who have given permission for their reproduction.
I had delayed publishing my interpretation of the scene pictured on the amphora, because I could not be sure that I had not been anticipated in literature inaccessible or incomprehensible to me. When however the opportunity occurred of delivering this essay in a shortened form as a communication to the First International Congress of Thracology held at Sofia in July 1972, the response of those present was such as to dispel diffidence, and I was asked to allow this contribution to be translated into Bulgarian, on the understanding that it would also appear in an English version.
3 See H. A. Kahn's note to Miss Simon's article (1960, p. 27). According to him the fraction after the numeral on the phiale may mean 2½ obols, if a small delta can be made out after what may be a tau.
4 See Strong, D. E., Greek and Roman Gold and Silver Plate, 1966, p. 20, n. 1Google Scholar.
5 Loss of metal by attrition and ignorance of the degree of precision possible with ancient weighing instruments discourages further speculation.
6 Loc. cit. (n. 3 above) p. 27. The deviations vary from — 1·0 to + 0·4 per cent except for Rhyton IV which is 1·9 per cent overweight.
7 These dispose of the wayward suggestion of Hoffmann (1958, pp. 121 f.) that the Treasure, with the exception of the phiale, dates from the age of Constantine.
8 The exact weight of the Lampsacene stater is not known, but Venedikov (1961, p. 22) makes out a persuasive case for Lampsacus.
9 As on the Chigi Jug (c. 640 B.C.), which has the earliest representation of this scene: see Schefold, K., Myth and Legend in Early Greek Art, 1966, plate 29(b), and p. 42Google Scholar.
10 For the parallelism between Herakles and Theseus, increasingly evident in art from the end of the sixth century, see Barron, J. P. in JHS 92 (1972) p. 23CrossRefGoogle Scholar; cf. p. 28, n. 71.
11 apud Schol. Vict. ad Home. Iliad XV 336: 
cf. Cramer, Anecd. Par. III, 286 (same information given in cod. Townl.)
12 On the maenad's posture, see Dodds', note on Eur. Bacch. 862–5Google Scholar, who compares 150, 185, 241, 931 and cites, inter alia, Ar. Lys. 1312. See too Edwards, M. G. in JHS 80 (1960) pp. 78–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar, esp. p. 82.
13 Curiously, the artist spelled Hera's name with a final alpha on Rhyton I but here gives the Ionic form HPH. Can it be that in the one case he used the spelling familiar to his Thracian customer, the presumed first owner of the Treasure, but that here, if we are right in thinking of him as a man from the Ionic-speaking area of North-West Asia Minor, he lapsed into the dialect-form which came most naturally to him?
14 The magisterial book of von Bothmer, D., Amazons in Greek Art, 1957Google Scholar, stops at the end of the fifth century, and the author is primarily interested in other descriptive features. Unfortunately some of the illustrations are somewhat unclear, so that I have been unable to use this to clinch the matter. Brandenberg, H., Studien zur Mitra (Münster, 1966) pp. 63, 69 f.Google Scholar, makes one inclined to think that this is a mitra rather than a sakkos. (I owe this reference to the kindness of Dr A. M. Snodgrass.)
15 There was dispute in antiquity about the maker of this statue: see Frazer on Paus. I, 33.3 (vol. II, pp. 455–6). Strong, D. E., Greek and Roman Gold and Silver Plate, 1966 p. 97Google Scholar, notes that the weight of the phiale is close to one found at Solokha (Ukraine), and on plate 23A he reproduces a similar one recently acquired by the Metropolitan Museum of New York, with a pattern of acorn-decoration.
16 Reproduced in Pfuhl, , Malerei und Zeichnung, vol. III, 707Google Scholar; Plate VIa is taken from the more detailed picture in a publication Greek Painting (1952, p. 21) issued by the Metropolitan Museum of New York.
17 It reappears in A, Frova's article on the Panagjurischte Treasure in Enciclopedia dell' Arte Antica, 1963, vol. IV, p. 924.
18 As in r.f. vases showing the Slaying of the Suitors (ARV 2 p. 1300(1) = Pfuhl III fig. 539) or the passage of the Sirens (ARV 2 p. 289 (1) = Pfuhl III, fig. 479).
19 So e.g. Roscher, Lex. der Myth. s.v. Odysseus, vol. III cols. 674–9, with figs. 11, 14, 16–19Google Scholar. Also on fourth-century coins from Ithaca (Head, Hist. Nummorum 2 p. 428) and Mantinea (ibid., p. 449). I had thought that this distinctive headgear of Odysseus was neglected by the vase-painters: see however Brit. Mus. 1947. 7–14.8, a Lucanian calyx-krater by the Cyclops Painter (dated c 410 B.c.): facsimile in Trendall, A. D.-Webster, T. B. L., Illustrations of Greek Drama, 1972, II. 11 (p. 36)Google Scholar. Add too an Italiote crater in the British Museum showing the Doloneia: Robertson, C. M., Greek Painting, 1959, p. 159Google Scholar (Odysseus on left). (I owe this reference to Dr A. M. Snodgrass.)
20 Odysseus alone: Hyg. fab. 96 (Rose); Eustath. on Iliad IX 662 and XIX 327; Myth. gr. p. 365, 14 (West). Diomedes as companion: Stat. Achill. I 539 f., 689 f. Phoenix and Nestor: schol. on Iliad XIX 326. Palamedes is mentioned by Tzetzes, , Antehom. 177Google Scholar.
21 The best reproduction of a part of this scene is in Artomonov, M., Treasures from Scythian Tombs, 1969, fig. 181Google Scholar; a sketch of the whole is in Minns, E. H., Scythians and Greeks, 1913, pp. 284–5Google Scholar. (This may have been the moment portrayed in a Polygnotan painting: cf. Paus. I 22.6 and Pliny, N.H. XXXV 134Google Scholar (Athenion)). It recurs on sarcophagi and in Pompeian wall-paintings, but seems neglected by vase-painters.)
22 Mitteil. des deutschen archäol. Instituts (röm. Abt.) 65 (1958) pp. 132 f.
23 B.Mus. E224: refs. in ARV2 p. 1313 (5). The panel in question is not visible in Pfuhl, M. und Z. vol. III, fig. 593, but is clear in Becatti, 's essay (Meidias, Un Manierista Antico, 1947), pl. 1Google Scholar.
24 Oxford, G 138, 14 (ARV 2 p. 1252 (49)Google Scholar: reproduced in JHS 25 (1905) pl. vii(b)).
25 Neither is Herakles as a seer (assuming the object in the hand of the figure to be a mantic liver) likely to have been recognised as such in default of external hint, such as an inscribed name. Apart from a note in Pausanias (VII, 25.10) of a Herakles-cult at Boura in Achaia, I know only sortes delivered by Herakles on a relief from Ostia. A cult-practice so thinly attested and only found on monuments from very different parts of the Mediterranean has next to no relevance to the kind of artefact we are discussing. (For illustrations of the Ostia relief, see Meiggs, R., Ostia, 1960, pl. XXX (a)Google Scholar; his description (p. 347 f.) is based on Becatti, , Bull. Communale 67 (1939) pp. 37 f.Google Scholar, cf. ibid. 70 (1942) p. 115 f.).
26 In Antike Kunst, III (1960) pp. 1 ff.
27 So MissRichter, G. M. A. in A. J. Arch. 74 (1970) p. 332Google Scholar; Strong, D. E., Greek and Roman Gold and Silver Plate, 1966, p. 102Google Scholar; Corbett, P. E. in JHS 84 (1964) p. 230CrossRefGoogle Scholar. In a letter to me recently Corbett said that he was not now so convinced of this interpretation.
28 Illustrated in Pfuhl, M. und Z. III, fig. 659.
29 Eichler, F., Die Reliefs des Heroon von Gjölbashi-Trysa, 1950Google Scholar.
30 Ferrara T 579, by the Painter of Bologna 279; ARV 2 p. 612. The illustration here (plate VIb) is from Aurigemma, , Il Regio Museo di Spina in Ferrara, 1934 2Google Scholar, pl. CXXV (cf. ibid. p. 256). On this painter's shortcomings, see Barron, J. P., JHS 92 (1972) p. 38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
31 Ant. Kunst III (1960), p. 15 ‘…hat man den herrlichen Schmuck des Bronze-kraters von Vix wenig glücklich mit den Sieben in Verbindung gebracht’. She cites without comment (n. 81) a paper by Delepierre, J., Le Sujet de la Frise du Cratère de Vix (1954)Google Scholar, who however argues for this interpretation of the Vix frieze.
32 ARV 2 p. 189 (74), reproduced in Pfuhl, M. und Z III, fig. 378.
33 ARV 2 p. 182 (3); illustrated in Pfuhl, M. und Z. III, fig. 376.
34 Dr Snodgrass reminds me of Theocritus III 29 ff., though there the omen-taking is not so formal.
35 ARV 2 p. 372 (32); illustrated in Pfuhl, M. und Z. III, 422–3 (422a–423a)Google Scholar. See, for some typical komos-scenes:
ARV 2 p. 72 (17); illustrated in Pfuhl, III, fig. 323 (Epictetus: all figures nude except one).
ARV 2 p. 78 (95); Pfuhl, III, fig. 329 (Epictetus: one reveller is shod).
ARV 2 p. 26 (1); Pfuhl, fig. 395 (Euthymides). Cf. ARV 2 p. 181 (1) (Cleophrades); p. 15 (6) (Euphronius, : komos on vase-neck); p. 325 (76)Google Scholar.
On the komos in general see de Marinis, S. in Enciclop. dell' Arte Antica, IV pp. 383–4Google Scholar, or Lamer in P.-W., , RE xi 2 (1922) col. 1297Google Scholar.
36 Philostratus, , Vita Soph., i 2 (p. 485, Olearius)Google Scholar. This passage escaped the notice of Copley, F. O., Exclusus Amator, 1956Google Scholar, who conscientiously assembles the other literary references.
37 One thinks of the embarrassment which Aulus Mancinus, curule aedile of 150 B.C., underwent at the hands of the harlot Manilia (Gell, A.. NA IV 14Google Scholar).
38 See Eduard Fraenkel's charming analysis, from this point of view, of Catullus' 42nd poem in JRS 51 (1961) pp. 46–53 (reprinted in his Kleine Beiträge, II, pp. 115–25).
39 I am very grateful to friends who have aided and encouraged my trespass into a field outside my normal activities, especially to Professor C. M. Robertson for his helpful discussion at an early stage and to Mr M. Vickers and Dr A. M. Snodgrass who kindly read the typescript; I have tried to take account of their criticisms, so far as constraints of space allowed.