Kings and gods of the late hellenistic Bosporus: attribution of the old one and new sculpture finds in Panticapaeum and surroundings (first quarter of the 21st century)
https://doi.org/10.18384/2949-5164-2026-2-200-211
Abstract
Aim. To analyze a group of archaeological monuments – monumental sculptures found on the Bos porus, using its example to show the peculiarities of the development of the history and culture of the ancient centers of the Northern Black Sea region.
Methodology. The method of formal stylistic, comparative analysis, as well as data from narrative sources is used.
Results. The group of statues belongs to the same chronological period, the con nection with historical figures and the manufacture of statues in workshops in Asia Minor (moreover, two were made by the same master) are proved. Research implications. lies in establishing the chronology and nature of the statues, clarifying the place of manufacture, and theoretically substantiating the evolution of the style and its definition.
About the Author
E. A. Savostina
Surikov Moscow State Academic Art institute at the Russian Academy of Arts
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Savostina Elena Anatolyevna – Dr . Sci . (Art History), Prof ., Department of Theory and History of Art, Faculty of Theory and History of Art
Moscow
References
1. Dillon, S. (2017). Approaches to the Study of Greek Sculpture. In: The Diversity of Classical Archaeol- ogy, 1, 223–234.
2. Ridgway, B. S. (2005). The Study of Greek Sculpture in the Twenty-First Century. In: Proceeding of the American Philosophical Society, 149, 63–71.
3. Vinokurov, N. I. & Yaylenko, V. P. (2024). Temple of Zeus the Genarch with a dedicatory inscription of Tsar Farnak on the settlement of Artezian in the Crimean Sea of Azov. In: Problems of history, philology, culture, 4, 231–271 (in Russ.).
4. Trofimova, A. A. (2024). Bosporus portrait – phenomenon, function, context. In: In search of the an- cient Bosporus. To the 150th anniversary of M. I. Rostovtsev: exhibition catalog. St. Petersburg, 168–187 (in Russ.).
5. Neverov, O. Ya. (1968). Mithridates Evpator and signet seals from Panticapaeum. In: Soviet archeology, 1, 235–238 (in Russ.).
6. Pollitt, J. J. J. (1986). Art in the Hellenistic Age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Savostina, E. A. (2012). Hellas and Bosporus. Greek sculpture on North Pontus. Simferopol – Kerch: ADEF-Ukraine (in Russ.).
8. Rostovtsev, M. I. (1913). Ideas about monarchical power in Scythia and the Bosporus. In: IAC, 49, 14–15 (in Russ.).
9. Savostina, E. A. (2024). Head of a female statue from the Hermitage collection: masters and traditions of Hellenistic classicism in Panticapaeum. In: Cultural monuments. New discoveries. Moscow: RAS Publ., 174–186 (in Russ.).
10. Bairami, K. (2015). Rhodes and Pergamon: Affinities in large-scale sculpture. In: Pergamon als zentrum der hellenistischen kunst. Bedeutung, eigenheiten & ausstranhlung. Berlin: Michael Imhof verlag, 156–164.
11. Ma, J. (2012). The History of Hellenistic Honorific Statues. In: Epigraphical Approaches to the Post- Classical Polis, 165–180.
12. Smith, R. R. R. (1991). Hellenistic Sculpture. London: Thames&Hudson.
13. Saprykin, S. Yu. (2014). Mithridates Evpator or Aspurg? To the identification of the portrait of the king from Panticapaeum. In: Antiquities of the Bosporus. Vol. 18. Moscow, 308–324 (in Russ.).
14. Trofimova, A. A. (2016). Tsarsky portrait on the Bosporus: chronology, typology, specificity. In: Bospo- rus elite and Bosporus elite culture. St. Petersburg, 68–74 (in Russ.).
15. Ashik, A. B. (1848–1849). Vosporsky kingdom with its paleographic and tombstone monuments, painted vases, plans, maps and views. Part 1-3. Odessa: type T. Neumann & Co,(in Russ.).
16. Zhizhina, N. & Zashlyapin, B. (2017). Fragmented head from a large female statue. Cat. 142. In: Panti- capaeum and Fanagoria. Two capitals of the Bosporus kingdom. Moscow, 276–277 (in Russ.).
17. Blume C. (2015). Zur Polychromie pergamenischer Plastik. Vom Attalos-Porträt zur “Athena mit der Kreuzbandägis”. In: Pergamon als zentrum der hellenistischen kunst. Bedeutung, eigenheiten & ausstra- nhlung. Berlin: Michael Imhof verlag, 135–143.
18. Palagia O. Marble Carving Techniques. In: Palagia, O., ed. Greek Sculpture: Function, Materials and Techniques in the Archaic and Classical Periods. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. P. 243–279.
19. Jacob R. (2019). Piecing, Attachments, Repairs. In: Palagia, O., ed. Handbook of Greek Sculpture. Vol. 1. Berlin-Boston, 657–689.
20. Queyrel F. (2019). The Portraits of the Ptolemies. In: Palagia, O., ed. Handbook of Greek Sculpture. Vol. 1. Berlin-Boston, 194–224.
21. Savostina, E. A., Vinokurov, N. I. & Kucherevskaya, N. L. (2025). Statue of the temple of the fortress Artesian: reconstruction of the appearance, technique and identification. In: XXVI Bosporus readings. Northern Black Sea region in the era of antiquity and the Middle Ages. Archaeology. History. Art. Greeks are barbarians: contacts and conflicts. Moscow: Indrik Publ., 206–213 (in Russ.).
22. Niemeier J.-P. (2011). Pergamon und der hellenistische Klassizismus. In: Grüßinger, R., Kästner, V. & Scholl, A. Pergamon: Panorama der antiken Metropole: Begleitbuch zur Ausstellung. Antikensammlung der Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin. Berlin: Michael Imhof Verlag, 327–333.
Review
Views:
40
JATS XML
Email this article 