Cloaked Female Statue, Variant of the ‘Grande Ercolanese’ Type

Roman art

The female sculpture, a variant of the so called ‘Grande Ercolanese’ (the prototype having been found in the theatre of Herculaneum), represents a Roman matron dressed in a long tunic and wrapped in a cloak, with the left arm stretched down her side, while the right is bent at the elbow and slightly distanced from the body, and holding up the cloak with her right hand; the head is ancient but probably not part of the statue type. This typology had an exceptional success for a long period, so much so that it there are several Roman examples, just as much in funeral art as in honorary art, as a perfect synthesis of the classicism of the figure and the moral values of honour, decorum and modesty expressed by the demure posture and the orderly arrangement of the drapes. Displayed in the then ‘Room III’ on the occasion of the set-up of the new collection in the Casino, between 1905-1915, it was later moved to one of the big aedicula-framed windows of the Terrace on the main facade. 

Object details

Commentary

In 1826 Evasio Gozzani, the Minister of the House of Borghese appointed to identify the sculptures for the decoration of the new collection in the Villa Pinciana Casino, described the sculpture as ‘Statue at one end of Viale del Tempio di Diana lifesized, excellent style, missing the nose, whole right forearm, and part of the left hand with drapes’ (Moreni 1997). Massimiliano Laboureur or Antonio d’Este were entrusted with the restoration as a Ceres, for a while the sculpture was displayed in Room I, in her honour named ‘Sala della Bella Cerere’ (Room of the Beautiful Ceres). Later moved to Room II, between 1905 and 1915 it was displayed, together with others, to decorate the large windows of the Terrace framed by the aedicula from the main facade of the Borghese Casino (Petrucci 2014). 

The female sculpture, variously identified as a ‘Muse’ or as ‘Ceres’, is more suitably categorised as a statue originally with an iconic role with an ancient head that suggests a variant of the so-called ‘Grande Ercolanese’, an iconographic type used for portrait statues and much loved in funerary art as in Roman honorary art (lastly Alexandridis 2004, pp. 238-243 n. 2.2.12; Daehner 2007; Fejfer 2008, pp. 335-338; Alexandridis 2010, pp. 263- 275 fig. 20.3; Dillon 2010, pp. 82–86; Trimble 2011; Davies 2018, pp. 175–185).

The majestic standing figure is slightly turning to her left: the weight is on the right leg while the left is moved to the side. Over the long-sleeved chiton, with vertical pleats, she wears a himation that falls below the knees, also enveloping the arms. The left arm stretches down her side, while the right is bent at the elbow and slightly distanced from the body; the right hand holds up the cloak which falls from the left shoulder: the pleats stretch and form an oblique line, crossing the torso diagonally and fall as far as the left wrist. The well-built head is slightly raised and leans to the left. The full oval face, has a triangular low forehead, wide nose, and a rounded chin. The large elongated eyes are set under wide arched eyebrows; the mouth is small, with full slightly parted lips. A central parting divides the hair into two strands that partly cover the ears and they meet and form a chignon at the nape of the neck, according to a style generically inspired to models of the 5th or 4th century BCE.

The ponderation of the figure and the triangular motif defined by the fall of the pleats of the cloak allow us to recognize the model in the conventionally known ‘Grande Ercolanese’ that, together with the ‘Piccola Ercolanese’, owes its name to the eponymous statues found in the scaenae frons of the theatre in Herculaneum (1706-1713) currently held in the Albertinum Museum in Dresden, of which the identity, chronology and authorship of the original is being discussed. The considerable number of copies (at least 202 for the ‘Grande Ercolanese’) has favoured proposals of attribution to famous sculptors – or to their ambits – such as Praxiteles, Lysippos or an artist from the Peloponnesian ambit, while some scholars place the ‘Piccola Ercolanese’ in the proto-Hellenistic era or both in the beginning of 3rd century BCE in a micro-Asian ambit. Other hypotheses have identified in the Grande and Piccola Ercolanese the divine copy of Demeter and Kore, thus explaining the difference of stature and clothing recurring in the two types, in addition to the presence of features such as the poppy and the ear of wheat in some copies of the Grande Ercolanese. Recently a contrasting ‘lay’ interpretation has spread according to which the two types have an independent artistic and chronologically distant origin, both created for portrait funerary or honorary statues of priestesses, high ranking citizens, poetesses or heroines. The perfect synthesis of the classicism of the figure and the moral values of honos, decor and pudicitia expressed by the demure posture and the orderly arrangement of the drapes, in fact, support the ample appreciation for the types in the Roman world for iconic statues of public figures and members of the elite, whose production was most prominent between the 1st century BCE and the 3rd century CE.

Stylistic and technical elements allow us to generically date the Borghese statue to the 2nd century CE.

Jessica Clementi