A Roman bust from Västra Vång
A comparative study investigating the context
in which the bust was created
Linnea Lidh
Master’s thesis in Classical
Archaeology and Ancient History
ARKM24
Spring semester 2014
Supervisor: Henrik Gerding
Abstract
The aim of this thesis was by a comparative study investigate the small Roman bust found in
Västra Vång to increase the understanding of the context is which it was created. The
comparative study was leaning on two hypotheses; that the bust was depicted with a so-called
melon coiffure and that the bust was a depiction of a barbarian. Two catalogues was created
on the basis of these hypotheses to be used as comparative material in the analysis. The first
catalogue contained portraits of melon coiffures while the other contained depictions of
barbarians in minor art. Both a comparative method and an iconographical method were used.
The concept of hybridity in Roman provincial art was considered for the discussion about the
hairstyle. The results from the two comparative studies was somewhat mixed, where the first
catalogue could provide a general picture of the melon coiffure while the second catalogue
were more difficult to draw conclusions from as the material varied. In conclusions it was
possible to say that the Vång-bust’s hair was a misunderstood melon coiffure created in a
hybrid context within a province. The Vång-bust could also be interpreted as a barbarian
created in a positive manner and thereby be an attractive object beyond the Roman limes.
Keywords: Västra Vång; provincial artwork; hybridity; melon coiffure; barbarians; Roman
bronze bust.
Cover image: The Roman bronze bust from Västra Vång. Capturing from 3D model created
by Freya Roe.
Acknowledgments
I would first like to thank my supervisor Henrik Gerding for all the comments on the thesis
and the support during the semester. Even during the most stressful times you have been calm,
positive and encouraging. I will also like to thank Anne-Marie Leander Touati for comments,
help and ideas.
I would then further like to thank Björn Nilsson for his help and also Blekinge Museum for
letting me use their photos of the bust. I would also like to give a special thanks to Freya Roe
for letting me use the 3D model she made of the Roman bust from Västra Vång.
And last but not least I am very thankful to friends and family for all their love.
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ________________________________________________________ 1
1.1 AIM AND RESEARCH QUESTION _____________________________________________ 1
1.2 METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH _____________________________________________ 2
1.3 VÄSTRA VÅNG – A BACKGROUND ___________________________________________ 4
1.4 BACKGROUND TO THE MELON COIFFURE _____________________________________ 5
1.5 THE BARBARIANS ________________________________________________________ 7
1.6 HYBRIDITY AND ROMAN PROVINCIAL ART ____________________________________ 9
1.6.1 PROVINCIAL ART ________________________________________________________ 9
1.6.2 HYBRIDITY AS A THEORETICAL CONCEPT _____________________________________ 9
2. MATERIAL ____________________________________________________________ 11
2.1 THE BUST FROM VÄSTRA VÅNG ____________________________________________ 11
2.2 ROMAN SCULPTURES WITH MELON COIFFURES ________________________________ 12
2.2.1 INTRODUCTION TO CATALOGUE A__________________________________________ 12
2.2.2 CATALOGUE A_________________________________________________________ 13
2.3 ROMAN MINOR ART WITH BARBARIAN DEPICTIONS ____________________________ 22
2.3.1 INTRODUCTION TO CATALOGUE B __________________________________________ 22
2.3.2 THE CATALOGUE _______________________________________________________ 23
3. ANALYSIS _____________________________________________________________ 29
3.1 THE BUST AND THE FINDINGS FROM VÄSTRA VÅNG ____________________________ 29
3.2 THE MELON COIFFURES IN THE CATALOGUE __________________________________ 30
3.3 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS – MELON COIFFURE ________________________________ 34
3.4 THE DEPICTIONS OF THE BARBARIANS ______________________________________ 35
3.5 COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS – BARBARIAN DEPICTIONS ___________________________ 38
4. DISCUSSION __________________________________________________________ 40
4.1 CONCLUSIONS __________________________________________________________ 43
5. SUMMARY ____________________________________________________________ 45
6. REFERENCES _________________________________________________________ 48
7. APPENDICES __________________________________________________________ 53
7.1 FIGURES: ______________________________________________________________ 53
1. Introduction
At the beginning of the Common Era the Roman Empire had expanded northwards to the
rivers Rhine and Danube. Trade and transport characterise the early empire and occasionally
there were contacts and trade over the Roman boarders.1
Already in the first two centuries CE the influence of Rome grew in Scandinavia, and
this has left traces in the archaeological material from this period. In both Denmark and in the
south of Sweden it is fairly common to find Roman objects in graves and deposits. These
objects are often connected with the military, but there are also other commonly found items
such as glass vessels, coins and art objects.2
In the small village of Västra Vång in Blekinge, Sweden, a small Roman bronze bust
(Fig. 1) came to light during an excavation in 2013. The bust has been interpreted as an
imported craft from a Roman province.3 This Roman bust will be my primary material and the
focus of this thesis. It is a unique and thrilling finding since objects like this is rare in
Scandinavian contexts. At a first glimpse the Vång-bust appears to be a male figure, but the
hairstyle looks like the so-called “melon coiffure” which is considered to be a female
hairstyle.4 With this in mind a lot of questions start to pop up. Has the craftsman
misinterpreted the hairstyle? Is it a bad copy? How can the bust be explained and understood?
This introduction chapter is divided into six sections. In the first section my aims and also my
research question will be explained and in section two the methodological approach will be
put forward. There will be a short background to the area where the bust was found in section
three and after that a background to the so-called “melon coiffure”. Section five will contain a
background and definition of “barbarians”. The chapter will end with an account of the
concepts of “hybridity” and provincial art.
1.1 Aim and research question
The aim of this thesis will be to increase our understanding of the bust found in Västra Vång
and try to put it in a bigger perspective. The question that the thesis will focus on is:
1 Björklund 1996, 15, 19.
2 Björklund 1996, 21.
3 Henriksson & Nilsson 2013, 40.
4 Dillon 2010, 114f.
1

What can a comparative analysis between the bust and other artworks tell us about the
origin of the bust and the context in which it was created?
There are two specific features about this bust from Västra Vång that will be investigated in
this thesis. The research question will be answered on the basis of two different hypotheses.
The first is that the Vång-bust’s hairstyle is a so-called melon coiffure. The second hypothesis
is that the bust is a depiction of a barbarian. If these hypotheses are true or not will be
investigated with a comparative method and this means that a comparative material is needed.
Two catalogues will therefore be created, where the first will contain portraits depicting the
melon coiffure and the second catalogue will contain objects that depict barbarians. Both
these catalogues will later be thoroughly presented and critical aspects of the contents will be
discussed.
The contents of the two catalogues will also reflect two different aspects of art, as
opposing materials. The melon coiffures will be represented mainly by big sculptures or
reliefs, which could be considered as Roman art, while the depicted barbarians will be mainly
provincial minor art. This has a point to the further investigation of the bust. For the melon
coiffure the interesting part is how the Roman themselves used the hairstyle in their art, so it
is vital to use portraits that are made according Roman art traditions. The depicted barbarians
on the other hand have the point of being something similar to the Vång-bust when it comes
to being at provincial artworks of a minor art type.
1.2 Methodological approach
As just mentioned, the two catalogues will be used as the comparative material for the Vångbust. A comparative method will allow me to put the Vång-bust in a wider perspective and
from there I will hopefully be able to answer my research question. I think that by comparing
the bust on the basis of the two hypotheses, there will be a possibility to put the bust in the
context in which it was created or at least get an indication of where the inspiration for the
bust might have come from.
The comparative method will be a major part of my investigation, but the study of
images in itself will also be a key. Therefore an iconographical method will also be used.
Iconography is the “the study of image” and at a very fundamental level it means to identify
2
motifs and images in artworks.5 An example of this is to recognise that a man depicted draped
in a lion skin and with a club in his hand is the hero Herakles/Hercules in Greek and Roman
myths.
The art historian Aby Warburg and his students developed the theory of modern
iconography. Warburg was arguing that art, in any given period, was connected with other
factors, such as religion, politics and social life. To use iconography as a method allows
scholars to draw conclusions based upon what is imbedded in the artwork.6
Iconography and iconology are two closely related words but are two different
processes in the interpretation of art, where iconology comes after iconography. Erwin
Panofsky, a student of Warburg, wrote about the three levels of iconographic/iconological
analysis. The first level, pre-iconographical analysis, is when the viewer looks at what is
visible in the image without any need of further knowledge. The second level, iconographical
analysis, is when the viewer works with identifying characters or known stories in the
artwork. In the last level, iconological analysis, the viewer works with the meaning of the
image where she anticipates the time and place of the creation of the artwork.7
So in simpler terms, iconographic analysis is where the inner symbolic and
allegorical meanings are found and iconological analysis is where the meaning of the symbols
and motifs in a cultural context are being interpreted. One should note that symbols are
something that represents an idea or entity, but symbols are also culture specific and their
meaning might not be fully understood by outsiders.8
In reality, it might not be that easy to follow Panofsky’s three steps, especially when we are
already familiar with the type of images that is studied. If we are familiar to an image type the
first step of Panofsky’s method might be skipped automatically. When instead being
completely unfamiliar with the specific type of image it may be hard to make an interpretation
at all. The step from level two to level three might be particularly problematic when dealing
with a cross-cultural artwork.9
D’Alleva 2005, 20.
6 D’Alleva 2005, 21, 22.
7 D’Alleva 2005, 21, 22.
8 D’Alleva 2005, 23.
9 D’Alleva 2005, 22, 23.
5
3
1.3 Västra Vång – A background
Here, in this section, a short background to Västra Vång will be provided together with some
information about what is known about the place. A short summary of how the bust came to
be found will also be given. Since the actual report about the excavation in 2013 has not been
published yet, this will be a quite short summary, based on the reports from earlier
excavations and articles from archaeological journals.10
Västa Vång is a small village in Hjortsberga parish, Blekinge, which is located nearby the
esker Johannishusåsen. The Västra Vång area has been known for a long time to be a place of
cultural value, as the region is full of graves in forms of stone settings and cairns, which can
be dated to Bronze and Iron Age. What also should be mentioned is the large Viking Age
silver treasure that was found in the area in the 1860’s. Based on data from graves in the
region it seems that in the late Bronze Age the settlements in Hjortsberga parish expanded and
Johannishusåsen became its core area.11
During an excavation in 2004 an interesting finding came to give the area a whole new
importance. A short distance from the excavation site the metal detector found a small bronze
mask upon on a plateau. This find was immediately given much attention since
representations of anthropomorphically objects from the late pre-historical times are rare
findings in Scandinavia.12
Not until 2012 the plateau could be partly excavated, and it resulted in a puzzling
stone foundation. Because of this discovery, later that year a geo-radar survey took place on
the site. The geo-radar result showed possible terraces and that the stone foundation seemed to
be a part of a complex pattern of stone foundations.13
Then we come to the excavation in the spring of 2013 when three more small bronze
masks were found together with a small bronze head, the Roman bronze bust and 29 gold foil
figures. All these objects were found in a concentrated area inside what, according to the georadar result, could have been a large building (10x4 m). 14
10
Some excavation reports have been published from the Västra Vång area (Grandin 2011; Henriksson 2006;
Henriksson 2008; Henriksson 2011) and also some articles about the site and findings in archaeological popular
science magazines ( Görman & Henriksson 2006; Henriksson 2005; Henriksson & Nilsson 2013).
11
Görman &Henriksson 2006, 6; Henriksson & Nilsson 2013, 36.
12
Henriksson 2005, 10.
13
Henriksson & Nilsson 2013, 38.
14
Henriksson & Nilsson 2013, 41-42.
4
The site meets many of the criterions of being a so-called Central Place.15 A Central
Place can be describes as a site of rich find material that indicates the site as multifunctional.16
The settlement is strategically placed close to the esker and in the middle of a valley. What
also should be noted is that the old road that connected the hinterland with the coast went
parallel with the esker. This road may have had the same, or close to the same, outline in prehistoric time. Västra Vång as a junction could possibly have had both a military and a
commercial function, since there are archaeological traces that inform us that the area had a
great diversity of activities, and advanced metal crafts is one of the activities. There are also
some indicators of an aristocratic presence in the first millennium CE and this is based on a
large hall building (20x6m) and glass fragments found in the area, both of which are
associated with an aristocratic milieu.17 The above mentioned silver treasure should not be
forgotten as it also points to a scenario where Västra Vång was a place of importance and
power.
1.4 Background to the melon coiffure
In the creation of a catalogue with portraits of melon coiffures there is a need for some sort of
definition of what the hairstyle was and what it looks like. This section will give a background
history of the hairstyle and also describe the features of the specific coiffure.
In Roman times a person’s hairstyle could say something about both age and status. The
hairstyle a woman chose depended on her social status, age and her public role.18 Sometimes
certain well-known persons in the Roman Empire were depicted with a distinct hairstyle and
sometimes the style was adopted by others to emphasize for example bloodline or political
sympathies. The hairstyles can be used for dating artwork since some hairstyles are typical for
some specific emperor or empresses.19 It has therefore been possible to construct a
chronology of Roman portraitures.20
15
Henriksson 2011, 9.
Hårdh & Larsson 2003, 27.
17 Henriksson & Nilsson 2013, 36; Henriksson 2006, 2, 8-9.
18 Bartman 2001, 1.
19 Blume 2012.
20 Bartman 2001, 1.
16
5
The specific hairstyle this thesis is concerned with was designated “melon coiffure”
(Melonenfrisur) by German scholars because of how the hair was arranged.21 So by definition
the melon coiffure was a hairdo where the hair was swept back in separated twisted parallel
strands from the forehead and to the back of the head and was there braided into a decorative
bun. The hairstyle was given the name because of these parallel hair strands that made the hair
look like a melon.22
The melon coiffure was first worn by Greek women and the small figurines from
Tanagra, Greece, dated to mid- and late fourth century BCE are sometimes provided with this
hairdo.23 It seems like the style originated from outside the royal society, but was later worn
by some of the Ptolemaic queens, and was seen as a fashionable hairdo that was both youthful
and elegant.24 Christiane Vorster argues that the melon coiffure was a complex hairstyle and
therefore needed assistance from a servant. She also says that this hairstyle emphasises the
elevated status of the person wearing the melon coiffure.25
The hairstyle had not disappeared in the period of Augustus, for example Cleopatra
VII was depicted with the melon coiffure, which often can be seen on coins, and Augustus
own wife, Livia, is sometimes depicted with this hairstyle.26 Young girls from prominent
families wore their hair in this style, but also adult women sometimes arranged their hair in
this coiffure. The hairstyle was therefore worn by both married and unmarried women and
girls.27
When it comes to Roman art and the periods in the Roman history there are elements
from different Greek art periods that were brought up and used at different points in time. As
an example, in both the Augustan period and in the Flavian period art from the Classical and
Hellenistic period was picked up and used by the Romans.28 I will by no means by mentioning
this, while talking about hair fashion, suggest that this necessarily means that the Greek
fashion was spread by this usage of Greeks art. However I do believe that there can be a
connection between the use of Greek art and the adoption of Greek fashion.
When talking about Roman art is important to keep in mind that the Romans took a
lot of what was Greek and made it their own. As the Roman state grew in the last centuries
21Kleiner 2005, 135.
22 Daehner 2007, 67, 120f; Dillon 2010, 114.
23
About Tanagra figurines: James & Dillon 2012, 231–234.
24
Dillon 2010, 116; Kleiner 2005, 135.
25
Daehner 2007, 120f.
26
Daehner 2007, 83; Kleiner 2005, 146.
27
Daehner 2007, 81; Dillon 2010, 116.
28
Hölscher 2003, 11.
6
BCE they controlled most of the lands that were Greek and Hellenistic. The Romans came to
adopt Greek cultural elements, including their art.29
1.5 The barbarians
In this section I will give a background to the concept of “barbarians” and also offer a
definition of the word. In a discussion about depicted barbarians it is vital to understand the
definition of the word and its meaning.
The term “barbarian” is a word that the Greeks used for foreigners, people who did not speak
Greek, and whose language sounded something like “bar, bar” to Greek ears. The Greek
definition of the word had only two sides; either someone spoke Greek or they did not. Later
on more elements were added to define their differences from the barbarians, like their
cultural, visual and psychological differences. These differences were created as a means for
the Greeks and the Romans to understand themselves and their world. The Romans came to
have a somewhat different view on the concept of barbarians compared to the Greeks. For the
Romans and their imperial system there was a possibility to transform from a barbarian into a
Roman citizen or a subject to the empire. This was done by the Roman conquests and also in
other ways in which they incorporated land and people to their realm.30
Rome was sacked, most likely, in 387 BCE by Gallic tribes, which lead the Romans
to create an image of the barbarians in their iconography. The Greeks had already given the
barbarians a negative image after war with them, and the Romans probably inherited this
attitude. Barbarians had a reputation of being savage and ferocious people and these concepts
of the barbarians were rooted in the minds of the Romans.31 The barbarians were quite
different from the people living in the Mediterranean so the Romans came to accentuate, both
in text and depiction, the features that made the barbarians different from themselves. Their
tall and great physique, their long hair, their wearing of trousers and the usage of different
weapons are all features that Romans noticed about the barbarians. 32
Even though the Gauls for a long time were seen as barbarians this would later come
to change. The border to the barbarian lands was in the Augustan era, after Gaul had been
29
Stewart 2008, 12.
Ferris 2000, 3 – 4.
31
Abbaye of Daoulas 1993, 45.
32
Björklund 1996, 23.
30
7
annexed to the Empire, moved beyond the new Romans limes northwards to the Germanic
lands.33 At this point the Germanic peoples had been identified as a separate ethnic entity.34
The general opinion of these barbaric people, as we have seen, was overwhelmingly
unfavourable and this was something reflected in art.35 In Roman art the barbarian enemy was
a quite common theme, especially as it was used as propaganda in official art.36 Most of these
objects of art were a celebration of the defeated barbarian. Some of the most famous artworks
are “The Dying Gaul” and “The Suicidal Gauls”, both of which are copies of Greeks works,
which were made after the Greek victory over the Gauls in 223 BCE. Later on the Roman
used these artworks so that they could be associated with the Greeks and their victories over
the Gauls. These depictions of Gauls were not just negative but they also showed the dignity
that the depicted Gaul showed in his moment of death.37 With the more intense military action
at the Roman limes the number of depictions of barbarians increased, and one example of this
is from the Column of Trajan.38
The definition of the word barbarian, for this thesis, will be of people living outside the
borders or the Roman Empire. This may be seen as a simplified definition but I think it will
give me a broader range of art objects to use for the comparative material. As a outcome of
this the Vång-bust will be compared with a wider range of objects with potentially different
art expressions.
The depiction of the defeated barbarian might have been a popular motif in a Roman
context. It is unlikely that a motif like that would have been desirable outside the borders, as it
was meant to show the Roman supremacy over the “uncivilized” barbarians. The bust from
Västra Vång might be a depiction of a barbarian but probably not as a “defeated” barbarian.
This is why the catalogue mainly will contain barbarians that could be considered to be
depicted in a “neutral” manner.
33
Björklund 1996, 23.
Abbaye of Daoulas 1993, 46.
35
Abbaye of Daoulas 1993, 46.
36
Björklund 1996, 26.
37
Abbaye of Daoulas 1993, 46.
38
Björklund 1996, 26-27.
34
8
1.6 Hybridity and Roman provincial art
1.6.1 Provincial art
When writing about and discussing Roman art, the objects of art from the provinces are often
forgotten or ignored. This is because provincial art are often seen as low in quality and bad
imitations of Roman art.39 But provincial art needs to be seen differently, namely as a mixture
of both Roman and local art traditions. This concept of a blend of two or more cultural art
traditions could be expressed as taking a hybrid form.
The notion of Romanization has been a key issue in the study of Roman art, as has
the extent to which it affected the art in the Roman Empire. In recent years the concept of
Romanization has been criticised for being a leftover from the values from Europe’s
imperialistic age. It is also seen to exaggerate the active role of the Romans in their influence
on their provinces, which also implies that the provinces merely accepted an imposed culture.
Roman art was not imposed but rather an influence in the way that the locals took parts of it
according to taste and preferences. In opposition to the criticized ideas, archaeologists should
consider the everyday people of the provinces and with this change the focus to the elements
in their art that are not Roman. Provincial art should also, according to this criticism, be
considered as resistance towards Roman values.40
1.6.2 Hybridity as a theoretical concept
To be able to study objects of art from the Roman provinces and understand what they
express and why they look like they do, there is a need for a theoretical perspective to work
from. In the study of the Roman provinces one tend to touch upon the notion Romanization,
which will be a starting point here before sliding into the usage of hybridity in archaeology. It
is hard to fully understand hybridity if I do not bring up the concept of Romanization first.
The concept of Romanization has been discussed for quite some time now, since the early 20th
century. The British scholar Francis Haverfield was the first to use the term in an analysis of
the study of the Roman Empire. He used Romanization as a term for the process by which the
provinces were “given civilisation”. The view that Haverfield held on Romanization has been
criticised as an outdated model even though it has been the dominant view in the study of the
39
40
Stewart 2008, 157.
Stewart 2008, 87, 158f., 160.
9
Roman provincial cultures. In the civilization process that Haverfield was talking about he
implied that the Romans gave the provinces both a new material culture and a new way of
living.41
Greg Woolf is arguing, in his article “Beyond Romans and natives”, that what we see
in the meeting between the Roman culture and the natives cultures was not a conflict between
them, or even an interaction, but rather the creation of a new imperial culture that replaces
both the Roman culture and the cultures of the natives in the provinces.42 Woolf is not the
only voice in the opposition towards Haverfield’s concept of Romanization. Andrew WallaceHadrill mentions that researchers working with the Roman provinces are now having a hard
time accepting the model of Romanization that Haverfield worked with.43
Alicia Jiménez discusses the concept of hybridity and the influences of Roman
colonialism in a local context, where she approaches new versions of objects coming from
outside.44 The term hybridization is a biological word that describes two animals or plants that
are cross-fertilized. The offspring is different from both parents but at the same time it does
have some characteristics of both.45
Hybridity, Jiménez says, can be connected to colonialism and even be seen as a
product of colonial power. The Romans had an idea about their own dominance because of
their humanitas, what we can call civilization, set against barbarism. This hegemony was only
true if “the others” were different enough so that the Roman could justify their own superior
position. However, there is an ambiguity with colonialism. The colonialist has a desire to
make the others more like themselves, but not entirely. The concept of hybridism as a model
for the provinces fits perfectly, where it as a process creates a provincial representation of
Rome.46
41
Webster 2001, 209, 211.
Woolf 1997, 341.
43
Wallace-Hadrill 2008, 10.
44
Jiménez 2011, 102.
45
Wallace-Hadrill 2008, 7.
46
Jiménez 2011, 117f.
42
10
2. Material
In this chapter the material for the thesis will be put forward. As already have been noted, this
thesis is based on the Roman bust found in Västra Vång in 2013. In the first section of this
chapter there will therefore be a detailed description of the bust, as it is my primary material.
Since it is my aim to try to understand the context in which the bust is created, it is my
intention to make a comparative analysis of the bust with other artworks. In the second
section of this chapter Catalogue A will be presented, containing Roman portraits that depict
the melon coiffure. Catalogue B, containing depicted barbarians, will be presented in the third
section. These two catalogues are both vital for the comparative analysis of the Vång-bust.
2.1 The bust from Västra Vång
In this following section of the thesis a detailed description of the bust will be provided. Since
the bust is the focus of the thesis and will be compared, in a later chapter, with other objects
this description is important. The more accurate and detailed this description can be the better,
as it later will be of help in the discussion. An interpretation of the bust will come later, so in
this section the description will be held as objective as possible.
To make the description of the bust I had access to high resolute pictures taken by
Max Jahrehorn at Blekinge Museum (Fig. 1-3). I also had the opportunity to use my course
colleague Freya Roe’s 3D model of the bust (Fig. 4-9).
The object is a small bronze bust around 8 cm in height (Fig. 1-3). The bust only consists of
the front part of the torso, where the back should be there is an opening to the hollow interior.
Around the torso there is a small flattened “edge”, which probably was made to facilitate the
attachment of the bust on another surface. On the backside of the bust there is a flat hook
attached to the figure’s nape. The head tilts slightly to the left and the neck is a bit curved in
the same direction. Looking on the bust from the side it seems like the figures head and neck
is tilting forward.
The chest of the figure is smooth except from the shallow furrow in the centre that
goes from the throat and all the way down and the two oval shallow indents in the centre. The
indents are placed parallel to each other, crossing the furrow in the centre. The shoulders are
placed somewhat further back than the chest and the transition between them is sharp rather
than soft. The same goes for the transition between chest and neck.
11
If we look at the figure’s face it is quite round with smooth surfaces. There is no
sharp mark of the jaw line but the chin has a cleft and is quite distinct. The figure has marked
cheekbones that are rounded and somewhat puffy which make the figure look kind of childish
from the side. The forehead is quite short and continues in a somewhat flat surface over to the
nose. The nose is long and narrow and the nostrils have been highlighted with drill marks.
The figures mouth is small; the lips are slightly separated and the corners of the
mouth are pointing down. The lower lip is thin which makes the upper lip stand out when
looking at the bust in profile. The eyes are almond shaped with a marked eyelid, iris and
pupil. The left eye looks strait forward while the right eye looks up, which gives the figure a
walleyed appearance. Over the eyes the eyebrow arches are well highlighted and shaped as
semicircles. The figures ears have been given a quite realistic look and are not covered by the
hair. Around both the eyes and the nose there are sharp marks, which enhances these specific
features.
When it comes to the figure’s hairstyle it is somewhat complex. In the back it looks
like the hair is combed forward, while in the frontal part of the head the figure’s hair is
twisted into nine separated sections. The sections of hair looks tightly twisted in the front and
on top of the head the hair is gradually untwisted. The three sections on the right side are
twisted in a different direction from the rest. The lines on the twisted strands suggest that the
sections of hair were created by tightly twisting the hair upwards and back. It is also worth
mentioning that the twists differ somewhat in thickness and that the hair is not centre parted
as there are an uneven number of hair sections.
2.2 Roman sculptures with melon coiffures
2.2.1 Introduction to Catalogue A
What will follow in this section is the first catalogue that is going to be my comparative
material for the bust from Västra Vång. The material in the catalogue will be seen as example
of the melon coiffure in Roman art. As already mentioned, the hairstyle was taken from the
Greeks and here in the catalogue I will gather Roman portraits depicting this specific
hairstyle. But I will also include some portraits that portray twisted hair strands in other
hairstyles, in order to try to understand the hairdo further. All the portraits in the catalogue
will have the twisted separated hair strands that are typical for the melon coiffure.
12
The catalogue will be ordered according to the dating of the artwork, with the earliest
first. All the items in the catalogue will get a catalogue number and information about each
object will also be added. All the portraits will also get a short description, which is focused
on the hairstyle. These descriptions will later be used in the comparative analysis with the
bust from Västra Vång. With the descriptions I will also be able to discuss the melon coiffure
further, both its usage and function.
Some decisions had to be made about what will be included in the catalogue. Firstly,
I tried to include Roman portraits depicting the melon coiffure from a broad time span but
within the limits of the Roman imperial period. Secondly, I did not only include empresses,
because I believed that it would not give a true picture of the hairstyle and its usage. The
catalogue will contain in first hand sculptures, but there will be exceptions. As mentioned
before I also included some portraits that actually do not depict a melon coiffure but rather a
hairstyle that uses the features of the same to get an understanding of how it was used. One
goal with the catalogue is to get a general overview of the melon coiffure and its
development; to get an understanding of who used the hairstyle and what function it could
have had.
2.2.2 Catalogue A
A1.
Limestone head of a woman resembling Cleopatra VII. British Museum, London.
Inv. 1879.0712.15.
Darting: 50 – 30 BCE
Measurement: 28 cm in height
Provenance: Italy
The item is a limestone head of a female (Fig. A1). She has almond shaped eyes that
are quite wide apart and a big hooked nose. Her hair is parted into a rather flat melon
coiffure all the way from the forehead to the back, where the hair is pulled behind the
ears. It is not possible to determine how the hair sections are twisted. Her hair is not
centre parted; instead one hair section is placed along the centre. In the back of the
head the hair is braided and put in a big round wreath. Small curls are placed in front
of the ears, at the temples and in the neck.
Bibliography: S. Walker, Greek and Roman portraits, British Museum Press, London
1995, 74.
13
A2.
Small Herculaneum Woman. Skulpturensammlung, Staatliche
Kunstsammlungen, Dresden. Inv. Hm 327.
Dating: 30 – 1 BCE
Measurement: 1.80 m in height
Provenance: Herculaneum, Italy
The item is a marble statue of a woman (Fig. A2). She has a long narrow nose, almond
shaped eyes and a small slightly open mouth. Her hair is twisted into sections, seven
on each side, and forms the melon coiffure. The sections are twisted out from the
head, downwards and backwards. The upperparts of her ears are hidden under the
pulled back sections of hair. The hair is centre parted and in the back there is a small
bun, created from a coiled braid. No wisps of hair are loose and the style looks rather
strict.
Bibliography: J. Daehner, The Herculaneum women: history, context, identities, J.
Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles 2007, 64-68, pls. 11–13.
A3.
Fragment from the Ara Pacis. Musée du Louvre, Paris. Inv. Cp 6488 (nº usual
Ma 1088).
Dating: 13 – 9 BCE
Measurement: Unknown
Provenance: Rome, Italy
This is a young girl depicted on Ara Pacis, with her right side of the body showing
(Fig. A3). Her face is partly destroyed, but her childishly rounded cheeks are still
distinct. She also has a protecting hand of an adult that cover some part of her head. It
is still possible to see the quite thick twisted sections of hair creating the melon
coiffure that ends with a bun in the nape. The hair sections are twisted downwards and
back.
Bibliography: N. Hannestad, Tradition in late antique sculpture: conservation,
modernization, production, Aarhus University Press, Aarhus 1994, 45-48, fig. 28–29.
A4.
Livia(?). Museo Arqueologico Nacional, Madrid. Inv. 2.737.
Dating: 14 – 19 CE
Measurement: 1.77 m in height
Provenance: Paestum, Italy
14
This is a seated marble statue that might be Livia (Fig. A4). She has big roundish eyes,
a small nose and a small mouth. Her hair is centred parted and has five sections of hair
strands on each side of the head. The hair strands look more folded down and inwards
rather than twisted to create a version of the melon coiffure. Some centimetres in she
has a thin hair band on top of the coiffure. The back part of the head is concealed
under a veil and from the side the veil does not reveal any sign of a bun or something
similar.
Bibliography: J. Daehner, The Herculaneum women: history, context, identities, J.
Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles 2007, 82–83.
A5.
Large Hercualaneum Woman. Skulpturensammlung, Staatliche
Kunstsammlungen Dresden. Inv. Hm 326.
Dating: 41 – 54 CE
Measurement: 1.96 m in height
Provenance: Herculaneum, Italy
This is a marble statue of a woman (Fig. A5). Her hair is twisted into ten sections of
hair that creates a melon coiffure. The sections of hair are twisted downwards and
back, but since the head is covered by a veil in the back there is no way to tell how the
hairdo is constructed in the back. Some smaller curls are placed in the hairline of the
forehead.
Bibliography: J. Daehner, The Herculaneum women: history, context, identities, J.
Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles 2007, 60–64, pls. 5–6.
A6.
Livia as Salus. Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen. Inv. 1422.
Dating: 41 – 54 CE
Measurement: 47 cm in height
Provenance: Cerveteri, Italy
This is a posthumous marble head of Livia (Fig. A6). A big part of her head is gone
but it is still possible to see some of her hairstyle. Her hair was arranged into twisted
section from her forehead and back. How far back the twisted hair sections goes is
hard to say but in the nape the twisted hair sections are collected to create a low bun.
In the back of her head the hair is brushed flat into the bun. The coiffure might have
had some resemblances to the follow item.
15
Bibliography: Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Romerske portrætter: katalog. 1, Ny Carlsberg
Glyptotek, København 1994, 100f.
A7.
Unknown woman. Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen. Inv. 1119.
Dating: Claudian period
Measurement: 28 cm in height
Provenance: Rome, Italy
This is a marble head of an unknown woman (Fig. A7). Her hair is centre parted with
five twisted parallel hair sections on each side of her head to create a melon coiffure.
The sections are twisted down and backwards. These hair strands only covers the
frontal half of the head and creates a board from ear to ear. In the back of the head the
hair is partly braided and combed down to the nape where a braided bun is created.
Bibliography: Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Romerske portrætter: katalog. 1, Ny Carlsberg
Glyptotek, København 1994, 238f.
A8.
Steelyard weight in the shape of a girl. British Museum, London. Inv.
1824.0496.3.
Dating: Flavian period, 69 – 96 CE
Measurement: 8.8 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
This is a bronze steelyard weight depicting a young girl (Fig. A8). She wears a lunula
around her neck, with shows that she is young and not yet married. All her hair is
twisted into sections which create the melon coiffure, and in the back of her head she
has a bun. Even though the metal is somewhat worn the twisted strands in the neck
shows that the segments are twisted down and backwards.
Bibliography: N. Franken, Aequipondia: figürliche Laufgewichte römischer und
frühbyzantinischer Schnellwaagen, Verlag und Datenbank für Geisteswissenschaften,
Alfter 1994, 152, cat. A182.
A9.
Unknown woman. Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen. Inv. 2797.
Dating: Flavian period
Measurement: 24 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
16
It is a marble head of an unknown woman (Fig. A9). The frontal part of the hair, from
ear to ear, consists of a lofty section of curls. In the back of the head smaller twisted
sections of hair are twirled together into a loop. The sections of hair strands are
twisted downwards and back into the hair loop.
Bibliography: Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Romerske portrætter: katalog. 2, Ny Carlsberg
Glyptotek, København 1995, 74f.
A10.
Head of a girl. Museo Nazionale Romano, Rome. Inv. 4248.
Dating: Second half of 1st c CE
Measurement: 19 cm in height
Provenance: Found in the riverbed of the Tiber
It is a marble head of a young girl (Fig. A10). Her hair is centre parted and arranged in
broad parallel strands that goes from the forehead and back. In the back of her head
the hair is arranged in a bun. The strands of hair look folded into broad strands, four
on each side of the head.
Bibliography: B.M. Felletti Maj (ed.), Museo nazionale romano: i ritratti, Roma 1953,
78, cat. 138.
A11.
Unknown young girl. Antikensammlung, Staatliche Museen, Berlin. Inv. Sk 633.
Dating: Second half of 1st c CE
Measurement: 37 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
This is a marble portrait of a young girl (Fig. A11). She tilts her head slightly forward
to her right and is looking down. Her hair is centre parted and all the way from her
forehead it is arranged into separated twisted strands of hair. The strands goes all the
way back to the back of her head, were the hair is arranged into a round and flat bun.
The sections are twisted down and backwards.
Bibliography: C. Blümel, Römische Bildnisse.: [Berlin, Staatl. Museen.] [Illustr.],
Berlin 1933, 20, cat. R47. [Non vidi]
A12.
Unknown woman. Musée du Louvre, Paris. Inv. Ma 3452.
Dating: Last quarter of the 1st c CE
Measurement: 25 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
17
It is a marble bust of a woman (Fig. A12). Her hair is centre parted with seven parallel
sections of hair on each side which created a melon coiffure. From the nape the hair is
also set into separated sections of hair that is twisted and pulled upwards. On top of
her head there is as oblong bun made out of braids. The sections of hair in the neck is
twisted and pulled upwards while the sections in the frontal part look rather folded
then twisted.
Bibliography: Musée du Louvre, Catalogue des portraits romains. T. 1, Portraits de la
République et d'époque Julio-Claudienne, Ministère de la culture et de la
communication, Paris 1986, 30f.
A13.
Statue of a boy. The Walters Art Museum, Baltimore. Inv. 23.71.
Dating: 1st c CE
Measurement: 115 cm in height
Provenance: South Italy (?)
This is a bronze sculpture of a young boy (Fig. A13). He has a smooth face with a
relaxed expression. The almond shaped eyes sockets are hollow. The boy’s hair is
centre parted and around his face the hair is arranged into twisted sections that are
pulled back from the forehead. A long braid, which starts in the nape, is wrapped
around the head like a hair band. On top of the head the hair is combed downwards.
Bibliography: C.C. Mattusch, Classical bronzes: the art and craft of Greek and
Roman statuary, Cornell University Press, Ithaca 1996, 114–115.
A14.
Unknown woman. Museo Nazionale Romano, Rome. Inv. 124476.
Dating: Trajanic period
Measurement: 26.5 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
It is a marble head of an unknown woman (Fig. A14). Her face is quite damaged but
the hair is still intact. She is depicted with a melon coiffure, where the hair is twisted
into parallel sections that are pulled from her forehead and back. On the top of her
head the twisted sections are gathered into one section and made into a big wreath.
Bibliography: Museo nazionale romano, Museo nazionale romano. Vol. 1, Le sculture,
9, Magazzini, i ritratti, De Luca, Roma 1987, 239–241.
A15.
Unknown woman. Museo Nazionale Romano, Rome. Inv. 4277.
18
Dating: Trajanic period
Measurement: 19 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
It is a marble head of a mature woman (Fig. A15). Her hair is centre parted and
arranged into a melon coiffure with a bun in the back of the head. The strands of hair
are twisted down and backwards. In the hairline in the front she wears a thin ribbon or
diadem that creates a sharp separation between her face and her hair.
Bibliography: B.M. Felletti Maj (ed.), Museo nazionale romano: i ritratti, Roma,
1953, 96f., cat. 180.
A16.
Indian(?). Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen. Inv. 2331.
Dating: 100 – 130 CE
Measurement: 75 cm in height
Provenance: Italy
It is a marble head of a man, thought to be depicting a man from India (Fig. A16). His
hair is centre parted and the hair in the front is swept back to a bun placed on top of
his head. In the back of his head, from ear to ear, his hair is twisted into sections and
pulled upwards to the bun. All the sections of hair are twisted in the same direction.
Bibliography: Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Romerske portrætter: katalog. 3, Ny Carlsberg
Glyptotek, København 1995, 220f.
A17.
Altar of Varia Sabbatis. Musei Vaticani, Rome. Inv. 1344.
Dating: 135 – 140 CE
Measurement: Portrait (with shell) 31.5 cm in height
Provenance: Rome, Italy
It is an altar in marble, with a portrait of a young woman (Fig. A17). Her face is
somewhat destroyed but her hairstyle is still intact. The hair is separated into quite
broad parallel sections that are twisted and pulled backwards to create the melon
coiffure. In the back of her head the hair is braided and put in a wide bun.
Bibliography: D.E.E Kleiner, Roman imperial funerary altars with portraits,
Bretschneider, Roma 1987, 239f., cat. 102.
A18.
Knöchelspielerin. Staatliche Museen, Berlin. Inv. SK. 494.
Dating: Antonine period
19
Measurement: Head, 19 cm in height
Provenance: Rome, Italy
It is a marble sculpture of a girl playing a game called knucklebones (Fig. A18). It is a
roman copy of a Hellenistic artwork. The girls’ hair is centre parted and then separated
into quite thin parallel strands of hair that go from the forehead and back. The strands
are twisted downwards and back to create the melon coiffure. In the nape the hair is
collected and braided into a discrete bun.
Bibliography: E. Rohde, Griechische und römische Kunst in den Staatlichen Museen
zu Berlin, Henschelverlag, Berlin 1968, 115, fig. 86.
A19.
Crispina. Musée du Louvre, Paris. Inv. Cp 6439 (nº usual Ma 1138).
Dating: 178 – 183 CE
Measurement: Head, 27 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
It is a marble bust depicting Crispina (Fig. A19). Her hair is centre parted and on each
side in the front her hair is pulled back and folded in. Behind this section of hair the
hair is parted into parallel sections. These parallel sections are not twisted but instead
folded downwards to create the look. In the back the hair is braided and twirled into a
bun.
Bibliography: Musée du Louvre, Catalogue des portraits romains. T. 2, De l'année de
la guerre civile (68-69 après J.-C.) à la fin de l'Empire, Ministère de la culture et de la
communication, Paris 1996, 330f.
A20.
Unknown young woman. Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna. Inv. ANSA I 206.
Dating: Beginning of 3rd c CE
Measurement: 25 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
It is a marble bust of an unknown young woman (Fig. A20). She has a very clean
melon coiffure, where the hair is centre parted and made into six strands of twisted
hair on each side. The sections are twisted down and backwards. But from the frontal
picture of the bust one cannot see what is happening in the back of the head.
A21.
Head of a young woman. Ephesus Museum, Selçuk. Inv. 1065.
Dating: First quarter of 3rd c CE
20
Measurement: 19 cm in height
Provenance: Turkey
It is a marble head of a young woman (Fig. A21). The head has been severed from the
neck so that the only thing remaining is everything above the mouth. She also misses
the nose and lover part of the ears. Her hair is centre parted and divided into twisted
parallel sections that creates a melon coiffure. She has eight strands of hair on each
side that is collected in the nape and folded upwards, to create some sort of flat bun.
Bibliography: J. Inan & E. Rosenbaum, Roman and early Byzantine portrait sculpture
in Asia Minor, London 1966, 130, cat. 156.
A22.
Head of a girl. Side Archaeological Museum, Side. Inv. 6.
Dating: First quarter of 3rd c CE
Measurement: 17 cm in height
Provenance: Side, Turkey
It is a marble head of a girl (Fig. A22). The head is badly damaged, as the nose and
chin is missing and so is a big part of the left side of the head. Her hair is separated
into twisted parallel sections of hair that go all the way from the forehead to the back,
and creates a melon coiffure. The sections of hair are gathered in the nape where they
are folded upwards to a flat bun.
Bibliography: J. Inan & E. Rosenbaum, Roman and early Byzantine portrait sculpture
in Asia Minor, London 1966, 193f, cat. 267.
A23.
Head of a girl. Bergama Museum, Bergama. Inv. 148.
Dating: Late Severan period
Measurement: 22.7 cm in height
Provenance: Asklepieion of Pergamon, Turkey
It is a marble head of a young girl (Fig. A23). Her hair is centre parted and divided
into parallel sections that is collected in the nape where the hair is braided into a quite
flat bun. The hairstyle is a melon coiffure. The hair sections are broad and flat and
look like they have been folded downwards rather than twisted.
Bibliography: J. Inan & E. Rosenbaum, Roman and early Byzantine portrait sculpture
in Asia Minor, London 1966, 115, cat. 124.
21
A24.
Sarcophagus of a child. Vatican Museums, Pio-Clementine Museum, Octagonal
Court, Rome. Inv. 1303-1204.
Dating: Middle of 3rd c CE
Measurement: Unknown
Provenance: Unknown
It is a child sarcophagus in marble depicting several children picking nuts (Fig. A24).
On the left part on one of the sides of the sarcophagus there are five girls depicted
picking something from the ground. All the girls wear the same hairdo, namely the
melon coiffure. The hair is twisted into big sections of hair that ends in a bun in the
back of the head. The sections are twisted downwards and back.
A25.
Bust of Plautilla(?). Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence. Inv. 1914, n. 218.
Dating: 3rd c CE
Measurement: 65 cm in height.
Provenance: Unknown
It is a marble bust of what could be Pluatilla. The young girl has her hair centre parted
and arranged into a melon coiffure. She has ten hair strands on each side that are
twisted downwards and back. In the nape the hair strands are collected and folded
upwards to create a flat bun. She also has some loose curls around her temples.
Bibliography: G.A. Mansuelli, Galleria degli Uffizi: le sculture. P. 2, Istituto
Poligrafico dello Stato, Roma 1961, 114, fig. 141.
2.3 Roman minor art with barbarian depictions
2.3.1 Introduction to Catalogue B
Here, in this section, the second catalogue will be presented. The material will represent and
depict barbarians and will be used as a comparative material for the Vång-bust in the later
analysis. The comparative analysis will be based on the hypothesis that the bust is depicting a
barbarian. The material will be ordered in the same way as Catalogue A, which is according
to the dating of the items with the oldest first.
22
The material in Catalogue B also needed to be discussed from a more critical view. There are
some problems that needed to be brought up considering the material, as it is a material that is
not as strait forward as Catalogue A. How could I be sure of that the objects are depicting
“barbarians”? It came down to whether or not the objects could be assumed to be or
interpreted as depictions of a barbarian, and also if it could be determined to be of the type
that could end up in the barbaric lands. I have looked for objects of the minor art type, since
one of the most important aspects of the catalogue material is that it constitutes exportable
objects. Exportable means that the objects could have ended up far from the place of its
creation, even outside the imperial borders. This gives the item a greater probability to end up
in a place like Västra Vång.
As previously mentioned the submissive barbarian was a common motif and a
frequent way of depicting the barbarian. The catalogue was in first hand meant to contain
objects that did not depict barbarians in this manner. However, some of the material could be
thought as being depicted in the submissive manner. We have two or three objects in the
catalogue that could be interpreted as being submissive, as they are kneeling or stretching out
their arms. It is therefore a question about interpretation. The material in the catalogue has a
lot of variations that might give us a broad picture of how barbarians were depicted in
different ways.
Some of the material in the catalogue has been called “barbarian” by the museum
where they are kept. This made it easier for me to determine if they could go in the catalogue
or not. Some of the items are not stated to be barbarians but instead they are mentioned as to
belong to a specific tribe or to a people that lived outside of the empire. This means that I
have used the already set interpretations of the objects, if they are barbarians or if they belong
to a group outside the Roman borders.
2.3.2 The catalogue
B1.
Barbarian statuette. The Walters Art Museum, Baltimore. Inv. 54.2293.
Dating: 332 BCE – 50 CE
Measurement: 13 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
This is a bronze statuette of a barbarian (Fig. B1). He is standing with one leg in front
of the other and is somewhat leaning forward. Both arms are held in front of the body
with the palms of the hands facing upwards. He wears a pair of trousers and a tunic
23
with a long sleeved shirt underneath and on his head he wears a Phrygian cap. He has
a smooth face and big eyes with hollowed pupils. The hair is arranged around the cap
in big locks of hair.
B2.
Phrygian man. The Cleveland Museum of Art, Cleveland. Inv. 1987.64.
Dating: 1st c CE
Measurement: 8.5 cm in height
Provenance: Rome, Italy
This is a bronze statuette depicting a standing Phrygian man (Fig. B2). He wears a pair
of trousers, a tunic, a cloak over his shoulders and a Phrygian cap on his head. He is
standing upright with his left hand grabbing his cloak while the right hand is raised as
to a greeting. His hair protrudes from under the cap and is arranged into wavy locks
around his face. He has a droopy moustache and a beard.
B3.
Kneeling man. Biblothéque Nationale, Paris. Inv. Bronze.915.
Dating: 50 – 150 CE
Measurement: 12 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
This is a bronze statuette of a kneeling man (Fig. B3). He is standing on one knee with
his arms raised and held in front of his body. He is wearing a pair of trousers, an
armless tunic and a cape over his shoulders. He has big nose and ears, deep set eyes
and a distinct cheek. His hair is arranged in a high knot on the right side of his head.
Bibliography: Bibliothèque nationale. Département des monnaies, médailles et
antiques, Catalogue des bronzes antiques de la Bibliothèque nationale, Paris 1895,
400f., fig. 915.
B4.
Emblem from vessel handle, depicting barbarian warrior. British Museum,
London. Inv. 1814,0704.904.
Dating: 1st – 2nd c CE
Measurement: 4.6 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
This is a small bronze emblem which is oval shaped with a scroll shaped feature on
the top with a drilled hole in it for attachment (Fig. B4). The upper part of a man is
depicted on the emblem looking to his right and with his right arm crossing his chest.
24
The right hand looks like it holds on to something on his shoulder. The man has an
angry expression in his face, with frowning eyebrows. He has a broad moustache and
a beard. On his head he wears what appears to be a head of a lion and over his
shoulders he wears a cloak.
Bibliography: B.H. Walters, Catalogue of the bronzes, Greek, Roman, and Etruscan,
in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities, British Museum, London 1899,
156.
B5.
Barbarian bust appliqué. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. Inv.
18.145.21.
Dating: Late 1st – 2nd c CE
Measurement: 6.4 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
This is a bronze appliqué depicting a bust of a man (Fig. B5). He is wearing a draped
garment over his right shoulder and over the left shoulder and across his chest he has a
strap. This strap could be a baldric as it looks like there is a sword´s hilt visible in the
low part of the appliqué. He has a thick neck and the head is turned to his right. He has
almond shaped eyes with drilled pupils and distinct heavy eyebrows. He has both a
moustache and a beard. His hair is arranged is big wavy wisps.
Bibliography: G. M.A. Richter, Handbook of the Greek collection., Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, Mass.1953, 125, 265, pl. 105e. [Non vidi]
B6.
Mušov Cauldron. Regionální muzeum v Mikulově, Czech Republic. Inv. 51/88-3.
Dating: 2nd c CE
Measurement: The decorative busts are between 8.7 and 9.4 cm in height
Provenance: Mušov, Czech Republic
This is a Roman bronze cauldron from a Germanic chieftain’s grave (Fig. B6). On the
cauldron there are four small busts attached which are decorative elements, but also
function as handles. The men all wear their hair in a very specific hairstyle, the socalled Suebian knot, in which the long hair is combed and gathered in a knot just
above the temple. The men are depicted with long curly beards and moustaches that
are twisted into sections.
The eyes are almond-shaped, they have quite deep furrows under their eyes and
the eyelids and pupils are marked. The nose is narrow and the ears are long and
25
narrow. The mouth is somewhat open, with the upper lip covered by the moustache.
The chest is smooth except from two cantered, parallel and horizontal, shallow indents
and the shoulders are placed somewhat further back so there is a distinction between
chest and shoulders.
Biography: J. Peška, J. Tejral & C. von Carnap-Bornheim, Das germanische
Königsgrab von Mušov in Mähren. Teil 3, Habelt, Bonn 2002, 569.
B7.
Steelyard weight depicting a boxer. British Museum, London. Inv.
1856,0701.5091.
Dating: 2nd c CE
Measurement: 11 cm in height
Provenance: England
This is a small bronze bust of a boxer in the form of a steelyard weight (Fig. B7). The
chest is smooth except from a smaller junction in the centre just below the throat. He
has a quite robust body and a thick neck. He has a round face, small and narrow eyes
and somewhat flat nose. The man’s ears are sticking out. He has a curly short beard
and a moustache. His hairline is uneven and the hair is cut short with a small pigtail in
the back of the head. On top of his head there is a hock attached.
Bibliography: N. Franken, Aequipondia: figürliche Laufgewichte römischer und
frühbyzantinischer Schnellwaagen, Verlag und Datenbank für Geisteswissenschaften,
Alfter 1994, 149, cat. A165.
B8.
A Moorish cavalryman. British Museum, London. Inv. 1856,0701.19.
Dating: 2nd – 3rd c CE
Measurement: 6.3 cm
Provenance: London, England
This is a small bronze figurine depicting a Moorish cavalryman (Fig. B8). His legs are
wide apart, as he probably was seated on a horse. He wears a tunic and holds a shield
face up in front him. He has quite big eyes, nose and mouth for his face. He wears a
moustache and a curly beard that are arranged into thick curls. The hair of the Moor is
arranged into thick wisps of hair around the head, similar to dreadlocks.
Bibliography: J.M.C. Toynbee, Art in Britain under the Romans, Clarendon, London
1964, 119f, pl. XXXIIa.
26
B9.
Balance from a scale. The Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, Russia. Inv. B
862.
Dating: 2nd – 3rd c CE
Measurement: 11.9 cm in height
Provenance: Rom, Italy
This is a small bronze and lead weight from a Roman scale, with a decoration in the
form of a bust (Fig. B9). The man is wearing a chlamys over his right shoulder
otherwise he is naked on the chest. His head is turned to his right. The man looks bald
on top of his head but in the neck and above his eras his short hair is brushed back. On
top of his head there is a hook attached. The man is frowning which makes his
forehead wrinkle. His eyes are set wide apart and he has a big nose and a droopy
moustache.
Bibliography: N. Franken, Aequipondia: figürliche Laufgewichte römischer und
frühbyzantinischer Schnellwaagen, Verlag und Datenbank für Geisteswissenschaften,
Alfter 1994, 156, cat. A203.
B10.
Barbarian. Musée du Louvre, Paris. Inv. Br 697.
Dating: Roman imperial period
Measurement: 6.8 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
This is a small bronze statuette depicting a seated man (Fig. B10). He wears a pair of
trousers, a tunic and a cloak over his shoulders. He is crossing his legs and has one
hand placed in his lap. The other hand is held up to his chest where he holds a round
item. The man has a beard and his hair is flat and cut so that it is longer in the back.
He has his eyes set rather wide apart and a somewhat big nose. His mouth is relaxed
and a bit open.
B11.
Kneeling barbarian. Museum of London. Inv. A28564.
Dating: Roman era
Measurement: 5.7 cm in height
Provenance: London, England.
This is a bronze statuette depicting a naked kneeling man (Fig. B11). He is standing on
one knee with his harms along his body and his hands clenched and held against his
hips. His head is slightly bent backwards and he is looking upwards. He has a round
27
face with quite big almond shaped eyes and his mouth is slightly opened. He also has a
beard arranged in big curls. Except from the fact that he is naked he has a tight cap on
his head.
Bibliography: J.M.C. Toynbee, Art in Britain under the Romans, Clarendon, London
1964, 120, pl. XXXIIb.
B12.
Chariots mount depicting a barbarian. Musée du Louvre, Paris. Inv. Br 4357.
Dating: Roman era
Measurement: 14.7 cm in height
Provenance: Unknown
This is a bronze statuette depicting a standing man (Fig. B12). He has a broad stance
with his right foot in front of the other. His left hand is placed on his hip while the
other hand is raised and is grasping something. He is wearing a pair of tight pants,
puttees on the calves, a long sleeved tunic and a cape over his shoulders. He has a
round face with a big nose and eyes. His hair is arranged into wavy locks.
28
3. Analysis
In this chapter the material will be analyzed. Naturally the bust from Västra Vång, which is
the primary material, will be discussed and compared separately with the material from the
two catalogues. The material in the two catalogues will first be discussed separately before
they are put up against the primary material in a comparative study.
3.1 The bust and the findings from Västra Vång
The analysis chapter starts by looking more deeply at the Vång-bust and some of the material
it was found together with. This is because the bust has been interpreted as a Roman
provincial artwork and we may ask why this is, and also what makes it look like a provincial
craft.
Firstly, the hair of the figure may be considered, which has the features of the melon coiffure
in the frontal part of the head. This means that the bust might be inspired by this Roman
hairstyle and can therefore be connected to Roman art. A further analysis and comparison
between the Vång-bust’s hair and the melon coiffure will come later. We can also consider
the fact that the bust from Västra Vång might be a depiction of a barbarian. This would mean
that the bust is not a depiction of a Roman but may be created by one.
We can look at other objects that were found at the site of Västra Vång as a comparison
material to further understand the Roman bust. Already in 2004 a small mask were found
there, which has a completely different look about it. First of all it has a typical Celtic torque
around its neck. It has not as realistic features in the face as the bust, since the mask has a
quite flat face, a big nose and a short forehead. The mask’s hair is centre parted and has two
long sections of hair, which might be braids, on each side of the face. The mask has been
dated to around the beginning of the Common Era.47
When the Roman bust was found they also found a small bronze head that has been
interpreted as a locally or regionally made object (Fig. 10-11). The small head is very
interesting as it is very comparable to the bust. They have similar features even though the
possibly locally made head has a much coarser look with fewer details than bust and is also
47
Henriksson 2006, 9.
29
somewhat smaller. It measures some five cm in height.48 The locally made head has a quite
round and somewhat flat face. It has small round and close-set eyes with marked pupils. The
nose is triangularly shaped and the mouth is small with narrow lips. The ears are quite
unrealistically made as they are roundly shaped and stand out from the head. Above the low
forehead is a very interesting feature, the hair is twisted into separated sections and goes all
the way back to the nape, just like a melon coiffure does.
I think that it is a reasonable suggestion that the Roman bust and the possibly locally
made head were attached to the same vessel or cauldron.49 If we assume that a Roman
provincial vessel came to Sweden and that one of the handles decorations fell off or was
damaged, the local craftsman might have made an attempt to copy the Roman bust to
complete the vessel again. A cauldron found in the Hochdorf princely grave is an example
that supports this idea, as this cauldron has three lions as decorations but one of them is
clearly a later copy of the others.50
As we can see from looking at some of the findings from Västra Vång it is evident that the
Roman bust is not made by the same hands as the mask and not the small head either.
Marianne Görman and Mikael Henriksson are arguing for the bronze mask’s Celtic character
since it is made in a typical Celtic fashion and also because of the torque around its neck.51 So
when comparing the mask with the bust I think it is possible to determine that the bust is not
Celtic.
3.2 The melon coiffures in the catalogue
In this section there will be a discussion about the melon coiffure, based upon the material
from Catalogue A, and an interpretation of the function and usage of the hairstyle. The
coiffure’s function and usage is important in the discussion that will follow when I put the
Vång-bust against the catalogue material. Some questions we can ask is: how did the Vångbust come to wear the hairstyle that it does? Is it a melon coiffure? Is it an interpretation of the
melon coiffure? How can we tell whether it is a melon coiffure or not?
48 Henriksson & Nilsson 2013, 40.
49 Can be seen on the Mušov cauldron; Peška et al. 2002, Pl. 88-89.
50 Biel 1985, 120.
51 Görman & Henriksson 2006, 21.
30
From the catalogue we are able to see that the melon coiffure was worn by mostly young
women and girls. But no rule without exceptions, as there is some portraits depicting mature
women wearing their hair in this fashion. There is also a spread over time in the catalogue,
from the rule of Augustus up to the late 3rd century CE.
What could be said about the melon coiffure itself is that even though there are some
specific features that make the hairstyle a melon coiffure there are some things that can vary.
The definition of the hairstyle is that the hair is swept back in parallel twisted strands from the
forehead to the back of the head, where the hair is braided into a bun. With this explanation it
might seem as a quite simple hairstyle that always look the same, but as said before: this is not
all there is to it.
What differs between the melon coiffures in the catalogue material is first the parallel
hair strands. They vary in numbers, in volume (how much they protrude) and also if the
strands are twisted or folded. Sometimes the strands of hair are quite few, as can be seen in
some portraits (Fig. A10, Fig. A17, Fig. A23). In these cases the strands of hair are also rather
flat and have the look of being folded into sections rather than twisted. In two other portraits
(Fig. A1, Fig. A12) the hairstyle is also fairly flat, where the hair sections are arranged close
to the head. In these two cases the hair also looks like it have been folded rather than twisted
into the separated sections. In the portraits of two young girls (Fig. A18, Fig. A25) the hair is
arranged in many twisted strands and with this follows that the strands are relatively small and
narrow. The material from the catalogue with the melon coiffures shows that it is more
common that the twists are roundly shaped and stands out slightly rather than lying flat
against the head.
Another thing that differs between the melon coiffures is the bun or coil at the back of the
head. They vary in that they are arranged differently and also located in different places. In
some portraits the bun is placed quite high up (Fig. A1, Fig. A8, Fig. A12, Fig. A14, Fig. A15,
Fig. A17, Fig. A24). One of the women (Fig. A12) has an oblong bun on top of her head,
while other women (Fig. A1, Fig. A14, Fig. A17) have their hair braided and put in a wide
wreath. One woman (Fig. A15) and some of the girls (Fig. A8, Fig. A24) all have quite highly
placed buns.
One woman (Fig. A2) is depicted with a very discrete bun in the nape, as the hair has
been arranged in an embedded braid, and a young girl (Fig. A23) is depicted with a similar
round bun in the nape created with a braid. Three of the young women (Fig. A21, Fig. A22,
Fig. A25) are all placed in the same period, the 3rd c CE. They all have a quite peculiar
31
arrangement of the hair in the back. Instead of a braided bun, the parallel hair sections are
gathered in the nape and then folded upwards.
The melon coiffure is nearly always centre parted, as there is only one case in the
catalogue when this is not true. The woman that bears a resemblance to Cleopatra VII (Fig.
A1) has an uneven number of sections with one placed right at the centre. Sometimes the
women and girls in the portraits with the melon coiffure also have some extra features like
hair bands or loose hair locks around the hairline. The woman maybe depicting Livia (Fig.
A4) is given a thin ribbon or diadem in her hair and another woman (Fig. A15) has a thin
ribbon in the hairline that makes a clear separation between the hair and the face. One of the
young women (Fig. A25) is a good example of how the coiffure has been given some extra
loose curls in the hairline at the temples.
The twisted sections are also nearly always following the same pattern where the
strands have been twisted downwards and back. There are some cases when it is hard to tell
by the portrait how they are twisted, one of the young girls (Fig. A14) is an example of this
and so is Livia(?) (Fig. A4), while others strands look rather folded then twisted.
The catalogue also includes some portraits where the hairstyles is not a melon coiffure, but
are still portraits that show hairstyles where twisted sections of hair have been integrated. I
wanted to show how these parallel twisted hair strands could be used in other types of
hairstyles. There are only two men in this catalogue, none of which have a melon coiffure.
But I thought it was necessary to include these two portraits since they are the only portraits
of men I have seen that are using these twisted strands. They could be a lead to the function of
the twisted strands of hair and also a clue to understand the bust from Västra Vång better.
One portrait (Fig. A7) is a case of where there can be a discussion about whether or
not the hairstyle can be considered to be a melon coiffure. From the front it certainly looks
like the hairstyle in question but on top of the head and at the back the hair is no longer made
into twisted strands. The hair in the back is instead brushed down and collected in a braided
bun in the nape. The hairstyle of Livia (Fig. A6) and also the young boy (Fig. A13) are in the
same position, since they both have hairstyles with twists only in the front. When considering
these three portraits and looking at the earlier made definition of the hairstyle, we can
conclude that these are technically not melon coiffures.
Two women (Fig. A9, Fig. A19) and the man (Fig. A16) are not portraits with melon
coiffures. They are instead examples of hairstyles that shows how the twisted hair strands
were include in other hairstyles than the melon coiffure. When considering the two women
32
(Fig. A9, Fig. A19) it can be noted that they come from different periods. As known, the
fashionable hairstyles of the women came and went quite quick. But as we can see from these
two portraits the twisted hair strands are used and incorporated into different hairstyles during
a longer period of time. This may indicate that the twisted strands are used in a practical way
to collect and hold the hair in place, but at the same time in a more decorative way than just
plain brushed hair.
We can then ask ourselves who used this melon coiffure and why? The material from
the catalogue with the melon coiffures indicates that the hairstyle in question was mostly
worn by young women and girls, but there are some exceptions. This lead to the next
question; why it was used by younger women and girls? Can the function of the twisted
strands give us a clue about this?
We had three portraits (Fig. A6, Fig. A7, Fig. A13) with the twisted strands only in the frontal
part of the head. This is the part of the head that is most likely to be seen and this gives me the
expression that the twists were used in a decorative way. If we instead turn to the three
portraits that was not depicted with melon coiffures (Fig. A9, Fig. A16, Fig. A19) they give
the expression of using the twist in a practical way, to collect and hold the hair in place. So it
seems like the twisted sections of hair might have had both a practical and a decorative
function.
With the idea about the practical function of the twisted strands we can continue the
discussion about why it seems like the melon coiffure was used by young women and girls. I
mentioned earlier that Christiane Vorster says that the melon hairstyle was something
complex that needed assistance of servants to create and that the hairstyle “emphasized the
sitter’s elevated status”.52 This can definitely be questioned, as assistance does not need to
come from a slave or servant. Assistance could be given by a mother, a sister or a friend. And
one cannot forget that even though slave owning was a privilege for the wealthy, it was not
limited to the very richest.53 This would mean that a high or elevated status is not necessarily
required to wear such a hairstyle.
The melon hairstyle in itself is not one of the most extraordinary or decorative one
from the repertoire of Roman hairstyles, but it is rather a quite simple looking and clean
hairstyle. This might be the clue to why this hairstyle where worn by young girls. The coiffure
is clean and holds the hair away from eyes and neck, which is something I think that a mother
52
53
Daehner 2007, 120f.
OCD³ 1416, s.v. “Slavery”.
33
probably would go for when arranging the hair of her child. With this I will argue for the
practical usage of this hairdo and one of the reasons why it is mostly young women and girls
wearing it.
After looking at the catalogue and the usage of the melon coiffure one might start to think of
how this can respond to the Vång-bust and the figure’s particular hairstyle. I will look at how
it is arranged compared to the material in the catalogue and also consider who used it and
why. The question will be if differences or similarities can be found. I will also look into why
this hairstyle is used on this little bust found in Västra Vång.
3.3 Comparative analysis – Melon coiffure
One of the most peculiar things about the Roman bust from Västra Vång is the figure’s
hairstyle. The figure, I would say, look like a man, but when considering the hair, which looks
like the melon coiffure from the front, one starts to wonder. From the above discussion about
the melon hairstyle it is clear that this particular hairstyle is used by the female gender. And
even more precisely by young women and girls. What can be said about the bust’s hairstyle
compared to a melon coiffure? Where can differences and similarities be seen?
As I have already mentioned the melon coiffure have some specific features that
determine the particular hairstyle. We have the parallel twisted strands of hair that go from the
forehead and back to the neck where the hair is collected and set in a bun. The parallel twists
and the bun are the two features that all coiffures of this type have, but there are also some
things that I have discussed that sometimes differ between the portraits in Catalogue A. The
Vång-bust should here be compared with the results from the previously analysis of the melon
coiffure, so this is where the detailed description of the Vång-bust comes to use.
I will start by looking at the features that define the melon coiffure and see if these also can be
seen on the bust from Vång. The frontal part of the Vång-bust’s hair is arranged in these
twisted sections, which frames the whole face. The small bust has almost the same
arrangement as two of the women (Fig. A6 and Fig. A7) and the boy (Fig. A13). This means
that the sections of twisted strands of hair do not go all the way to the back, as is normally
does on the melon coiffures.
The twists in the bust’s hair are also arranged quite roughly in different sizes and the
hair is not centre parted (Fig. 5, Fig. 9) as there are nine strands in total. The portraits in the
34
catalogue have in general carefully arranged twists and centre parted hair. Another interesting
thing to mention is that the melon coiffures in the catalogue in general had the strands twisted
downwards and back. The Vång-bust’s strands are twisted upwards and then back, where the
three strands in the right is mirrored from the six strands on the left side.
At the backside of the bust’s head (Fig. 7-9) the hair is flat with some markings of
the hair, which makes it looks like the hair has been combed forward. There is a smooth
transition between the hair in the back and the tightly twists in the front. All the portraits in
the catalogue with a high set bun (Fig. A8, A12, A16, A24) has twists in the neck that are
pulled upwards to the bun. Were the hair strands instead covers the whole head, like some of
the portraits in the catalogue, the bun is instead placed low in the nape. This means that the
twists are always attached in a bun and this also makes the twists hold together and not
dissolve. If the hair on the Vång-bust is combed upwards from the neck the bun should be
placed high. The Vång-bust, as said, does not have a bun that can be seen, neither on top of
the head or low placed in the nape, because there is where the hook is.
The young girl depicted on a weight (Fig. A8) is interesting as it is the only small objects in
Catalogue A and also equal in size to the Vång-bust. She does not really fit in to Catalogue A
since she is not a sculpture. However, the girl is an interesting object because she is an
example where this hairstyle is used in minor art. This shows us that small objects like this
could look like the portraits. It is possible to suggest that the Vång-bust may have received its
influences from items like this that is equal both in size and material.
In conclusions, there are some vital differences that can be seen in this comparison
that will be brought up in the next chapter for a further discussion.
3.4 The depictions of the Barbarians
In this section the material from Catalogue B, which comprises depicted barbarians, will be
presented and analyzed. The definition of the word barbarian has already been clarified in the
first chapter. Here the material will be investigated closer to find features that the objects have
in common, and also the features that keep them apart. This will hopefully provide us with
some idea of how barbarians were portrayed.
I mentioned before, in the background of the barbarians, that the Romans often
depicted the barbarians with the features that they saw as different from themselves, and these
elements were their clothing, weapons, physique and hair. Can any of these features be seen
35
in the material collected in Catalogue B? Are there any features that can be determined as
typical for barbarian?
When looking at the barbarians and their clothing there is one problem, namely that some of
the objects are only busts and therefore most of their body is not showing. But there are some
conclusions that can be drawn from the catalogue about their clothes. Most of the barbarian
figures are wearing some sort of clothes. There are only three figures (Fig. B6, Fig. B7, Fig.
B11) that seems not to be dressed. The first bare barbarian is the small bust (Fig. B6) with a
hair knot above his right temple. His special hair knot helps us identify him to belong to the
Germanic Suebi tribe.54 The man depicted on a weight (Fig. B7) can be discussed because he
has been interpreted as a boxer, and this might explain his muscular body, scruffy beard and
why he is depicted bare breasted. The last barbarian depicted nude is one of the kneeling
statuettes (Fig. B11). He is only wearing a tight fitting cap on his head.
Two barbarians (Fig. B5, Fig. B9) are depicted wearing only some sort of tunic,
which are attached over the right shoulder and leaves the left arm and shoulder bare. The rest
of the depicted barbarians are wearing clothes. In fact, they have almost the same type of
clothes; a pair of trousers, a tunic and a cloak over the shoulders. There are some features like
the length of sleeves and trousers that differs. Only one man (Fig. B1) is fully dressed but
does not wear a cloak over the clothes. The man on the small emblem (Fig. B4) is an
exception from this as there is only the bust depicted and therefore it is impossible to say
exactly what he is wearing.
Four of the barbarians (Fig. B1, Fig. B2, Fig. B4, Fig.B11) are all wearing some sort
of cap on their head. The first two (Fig. B1, Fig. B2) both depict Phrygians, which can be seen
just by their caps. One of the men (Fig. B4) is wearing a lion’s head as a cap while the nude
kneeling man (Fig. B11) is wearing a tightly fitted cap. This cap might also be from an animal
skin because of the animal ears that is visible in the back of the cap, according to descriptions
of the figurine.55
Another aspect of the barbarian’s appearance is their hair and facial hair. By looking at the
material in the catalogue and at the barbarian’s hair we can quickly establish that they have
quite different hairstyles.
54
55
Ament 2003, 46.
Toynbee 1964, 120.
36
Some of them have their hair in big wavy locks (Fig. B1, Fig. B2, Fig. B5, Fig. B12).
The Moorish horseman (Fig. B8) has his hair arranged in big separated locks, something that
can be referred to as dreadlocks. There are two men (Fig. B3, Fig. B6) that both wear their
hair in a Suebian knot. The long hair is combed to the right side of the head and there
gathered into a knot. The boxer (Fig. B7) has a short haircut with a pigtail in the back, which
was common for Roman boxers.56 The men depicted on a steelyard weight (Fig. B9) is, from
what can be seen in the picture, bald on top of his head and then the short hair in the neck and
over the ears combed back. The seated man (Fig. B10) has quite long hair that is combed
straits down from the hop of his head. The remaining two men (Fig. B4, Fig. B11) both have a
cap that covers their head and no hair is visible.
Then the facial hair needs to be mentioned as well, as most of the barbarians are depicted with
a beard. There are seven of the men ( Fig. B2, Fig. B4, Fig. B5, Fig. B6, Fig. B7, Fig. B8, Fig.
B10) that all are depicted with both beard and a moustache, but differs in length. The boxer
(Fig. B7) has for example a short curly beard while one of the Suebi (Fig. B6) and the Moor
(Fig. B8) have long beards arranged into separated locks.
There are also some of the barbarians that are depicted with either just a moustache
or a beard. The man on the weight (Fig. B9) has only a droopy moustache while the nude
kneeling man (Fig. B11) has only a short curly beard. The rest of the barbarians in the
catalogue (Fig. B1, Fig. B3, Fig.B12) have no facial hair at all.
Barbarians were depicted with features that put them apart from Romans and one of these
features was their weapons. In this category other military equipment will be included as well,
for example armour. So what can be said about this in the catalogue?
There are actually only two barbarians in the catalogue that can be discussed in this
category. First we have the man in (Fig. B5) who carries a sword. The only part of the sword
that can be seen is the hilt that just barely can be seen on the appliqués lover part. The second
barbarians is the Moor (Fig. B8) that holds a shield facing up in front of him.
So what conclusions can be draw from the above mentioned features that can be seen from the
material in the catalogue? We have the clothing, the hair arrangements and finally the
category of military equipment.
56
http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=1363281&p
artId=1&searchText=1856,0701.5091&page=1 [2014-05-07]
37
From the material discussed above it is possible to conclude that most of the
barbarians are depicted with clothes. That is, with trousers, tunic and cloak, but at the same
time they are also most often depicted without a headdress. We can also conclude that the
barbarian have quite different hairstyles, with different texture and length. Beard and
moustache are both well used amongst the barbarians in the catalogue, either in combination
or just one of the two. The material in the catalogue also provides us with the conclusion that
the barbarians are mostly not depicted with weapons or amour.
The most striking thing with the catalogue is that there is a big variation among the
barbarians. The catalogue material is heterogeneous and depicts several types or aspects of the
barbarians. Some of the barbarians can be seen as taking a submissive pose, while others
might be depicted with distinct features to highlight their foreign origin and “ethnicity”. The
two Phrygians are also somewhat problematic, as they technically are not barbarians, in that
sense that Phrygia where a part of the Asia, the Roman province.57 The reason for them to be
in the catalogue is because they are depicted with attributes that marks them as non-Roman.
In conclusions it is possible to say that here is not one specific way of depicting the
barbarians.
3.5 Comparative analysis – Barbarian depictions
The hypothesis that the Vång-bust is a depiction of a barbarian led to the creation of the above
discussed and compared catalogue material. In a comparative study between the catalogue
material and the bust it may be possible to find some resemblances or typical features that can
strengthen this hypothesis. But how should we approach this comparative analysis with such a
heterogeneous comparative material, from which no conclusions could be drawn about
general features that barbarians were depicted with? The Vång-bust will be compared with the
catalogue material to see if there are some features it has in common with any of the objects
in the catalogue that can lead to some conclusions.
Starting off with the clothing will be a quite short discussion, as the bust from Vång
is seemingly depicted naked. There were actually three of the barbarians from the catalogue
that were depicted naked. First we had the Suebi depicted on a vessel handle (Fig. B6) then
the weight in the form of a boxer (Fig. B7) and last the nude kneeling figurine (Fig. B11).
57
http://www.oxfordreference.com.ludwig.lub.lu.se/view/10.1093/acref/9780192801463.001.0001/acref9780192801463-e-245?rskey=adTnLV&result=2 [2014-05-28]
38
The boxer and the Suebi are both busts, which gives them a very close resemblance
to the bust from Vång. The boxer is quite robust, which is one of the features that strengthens
that he is a boxer. The Germanic Suebi’s chest is very much crafted in the same way as the
Vång-bust’s. They have the same smooth surfaces; the shoulders are emphasized with a clear
distinction from the chest and then the two oblong indents in the middle of the chest. The man
in the steelyard weight (Fig. B9) has also some similar feature. This man is depicted wearing
only a garment that covers his chest and left shoulder. His shoulder and his chest are clearly
distinguished from each other and also a furrow along the centre of the chest is clearly visible,
just like the Vång-bust’s chest.
Then we have an interesting discussion about the hair and facial hair amongst the barbarians.
This part will be related, in some sense, to the above discussed about the Vång-bust melon
hairstyle.
The Vång-bust’s hairstyle is clearly not similar to any of the barbarians in the
catalogue. Most of the barbarians in the catalogue are depicted with big wavy locks. However,
some of the barbarians are depicted with hairstyles that help us to identify their “ethnic”
belonging. The two Suebi men (Fig. B3, Fig. B6) and the Moor (Fig. B8) are example of
where the hair is an identity marker. The Moor is the only one with something that could look
like the Vång-bust’s hair, but his hair is arranged more like thick dreadlocks.
The bust from Vång is both moustache- and beardless. This makes him quite
different from what can be seen from the catalogue material. As concluded in the previous
section, the barbarians were often depicted with both beard and moustache or just one of
them. There are only three men from the catalogue without any facial hair; these are one
Phrygian (Fig. B1), one Suebi (Fig. B3) and the man on the chariot mount (Fig. B12).
The last thing that should be mentioned is the third discussed category, the one of weapons
and armoury. Most of the barbarians in the catalogue were depicted without any weapons or
armour. This is also true for the Vång-bust.
In conclusion it seems like the Vång-bust does not follow the “average” barbarian in the
catalogue as it is both depicted with a bare chest and no facial hair. However, the fact that the
Vång-bust has the bare chest and other features in common with the items that resemble it in
both size and appearance (small busts) should be further discussion in the next chapter.
39
4. Discussion
In this chapter I will lead a more thorough discussion about the Vång-bust and the
comparative material. Here all the interesting aspects will be brought up and examined
further. I will also aim to approach the research question.
I will start the discussion chapter with the hypothesis that the Vång-bust should have been
depicted with a melon coiffure. In the analysis the Vång-bust’s hair was compared with the
material from the catalogue. It was there possible to see that the bust do have some features
that place it apart from the melon coiffure. But there are also some details that make the
hairstyle interesting. The bust’s hair can be seen as a misinterpreted melon coiffure. To
strengthen this proposition I will discuss the twists in the front, the combed hair in the back
and the non-existing bun a bit further.
The hair in the back of the bust’s head is combed upwards and with this it is possible
to say that the hook in the nape does not cover a supposed bun, because the bun should be
where the hair is collected. This suggests that the bun instead should be placed on top of the
head, like some of the portraits in Catalogue A (Fig. A8, Fig. A12). Theses portraits have their
hair arranged in twists in the neck too and then these are collected in the high placed bun.
Even though the Vång-bust has combed hair instead of twists in the neck there should in
theory be a bun that holds the hair up in place, but there is none.
The parallel twists in the Vång-bust’s hair only cover the frontal part of the head, and
is thereby similar to three portraits (Fig. A6, Fig. A7, Fig. A13) in Catalogue A. The twists on
the head are arranged so that they are tightly twisted in the front but then on top of the head
there is just a smooth transition between combed hair and twisted sections. The twists then
become a mystery of how they can keep together and not dissolve if they are not attached
somewhere. There should be a bun on top of the Vång-bust’s head to hold the hair in its
position, and to make sense.
The twisted strands in themselves are also a mystery in the sense that the twists are
arranged in a strange way. The melon coiffures in the catalogue have their hair sections
arranged so that they are twisted downwards and back, where they are attached. The Vångbust’s strands look like they are twisted upwards and back. If the hair instead is twisted from
the top of the head and pulled down towards the forehead they can be interpreted as twisted
downwards. Neither of these two ways correlates to what can be seen at the melon coiffures
40
from the catalogue. With this it is possible to say that the Vång-bust’s hair is arranged in a
strange way that makes little sense on how it holds and stay as it does.
The Vång-bust’s hair can therefore be seen as a misunderstood hairstyle, made by someone
who tried to create something he or she did not have the skills or the knowledge to do. Or
someone was trying to only capture the essence of the melon coiffures twisted hair strands but
then missed the point where the strands should be fixed to keep in place. Either way, this is
where the small bust from Västra Vång can be seen in the light of hybridity. If we see the bust
as a hybrid craft the hairstyle should not be seen as a bad copy of how the Roman used this
specific hairstyle. Instead the small bust should be seen in the context of the creator’s
knowledge and taste. To take a hybrid form, an objects is supposed to be a representation of
two (or more) ideas, or in this case artistic styles. The Vång-bust can thereby be said to have
been created in a hybrid context, as a part of my answer to my research question.
The little Girl on the bronze weight (Fig. A8) in Catalogue A wears a high bun on her
head with the hair twisted from the forehead and back and from the neck and up. Perhaps this
might be what the creator of the Vång-bust was copying, something that is close in size but at
the same times resembles the young girls in the sculptures.
We will now move to the other hypothesis that this thesis started with, about the Vång-bust
being a barbarian. Catalogue B’s material includes some variations when it comes to
depictions of barbarians. Some of the barbarians are portrayed without clothes and some with,
and some of the barbarians have striking features to highlight their identity as a Phrygian (Fig.
B1, Fig. B2), Suebi (Fig. B3, B6) or Moor (Fig. B8). This means that it is hard to compare the
Vång-bust with the catalogue material. Instead it might give some results to concentrate on
some general traits that define a barbarian and also look at the different representations of
barbarians and their and their attributes.
As mentioned before, the Romans highlighted the differences when they depicted barbarians,
in order to create a distance between themselves and the “others”. For the Vång-bust to be a
barbarian it should in simple terms not carry any traits of being a Roman. The toga for
example would have been a marker for Roman identity and citizenship.58 Nudity, on the other
hand, can be seen as a more un-Roman way of depicting themselves.59 We have seen some
58
59
Wallace-Hadrill 2008, 41.
Walker 1995, 106.
41
barbarians in the catalogue depicted in this manner and the Vång-bust has this in common
with them. Barbarians were described by ancient authors as walking around naked or bare
above the waist.60 The Germanic Suebi on the Mušov cauldron (Fig. B6) is a depiction with a
bare chest.
In fact, the Vång-bust has some similarities with the bust on the Mušov cauldron.
This was already noted in the analysis but it is worth bringing up again. They have both likely
been attached to vessels and they are very close in size. Even though the Vång-bust looks
somewhat rougher made, with the sharp marks around the eyes and nostrils, they do have
some features in the face that is very similar. The eyelids are emphasised under curved
eyebrows, the nose has the same shape and the mouth have the same relaxed expression and is
slightly opened. The chest and shoulders are similarly portrayed, even when it comes to the
small oblong indents in the middle of the chest.
Considering the notion that a bare chest is a barbaric attribute together with the
striking similarities with the Germanic barbarian it is possible to suggest that the Vång-bust
could be a barbarian. These are somewhat week arguments since the bust doesn’t have any
distinct attributes like the special Phrygian cap or the Suebian knot to emphasise this theory.
On the other hand, it might be important to remember that we conclude from the material in
Catalogue B that barbarians could be depicted in many different ways.
If the bust is considered a barbarian it cannot be placed in the group with the
barbarians depicted as submissive; it is then more likely that the bust depict a barbarian in a
positive manner. There are no signs that the bust is depicted in a negative way and this is also
strengthen of that fact that the bust was exported beyond the Roman borders in to the barbaric
lands where it was found.
Here in the end of the discussion we should briefly consider the two conclusions at the same
time; is it then possible that the Vång-bust is depicted with a misinterpreted melon coiffure
and still be interpreted as a barbarian?
An interesting thing is that hairstyles could be an attribute that identified “ethnic”
belonging.61 The Vång-bust’s hairstyle, as we just established, could be interpreted as a
misunderstood melon coiffure produced in a hybrid context were its supposed original usage
and appearance no longer have to be the same. Romans generally considered long hair to be
barbaric, and they often depicted Germanic people with long hair or with the Suebian knot
60
61
Noble 2006, 139.
Noble 2006, 142.
42
that acted as a generalized sign for Germanic people.62 To be able to create a melon coiffure,
like the ones in Catalogue A, you need quite long hair to be able to fix the tightly twisted
strands and the bun. My interpretation of the melon coiffure’s function as being practical
could be a further lead in this discussion. The Vång-bust’s creator could have used the twisted
strands from the melon coiffure in a way to express the hair as being long, as barbaric men
had.
4.1 Conclusions
The aim of this thesis was to compare the bust from Västra Vång with other artworks to try to
find out in what context the bust was created in. From the discussion about the comparative
analysis I was able to draw some conclusions.
The Vång-bust’s hairstyle can be regarded as a misinterpreted melon coiffure created in a
hybrid context. This conclusion can be drawn because the Vång-bust’s hair does have the
twisted strands that mark the melon coiffure but it also differs in some feature, which makes it
appear somewhat strange. Firstly, the twisted strands are only placed on the frontal half of the
head and secondly, the strands are twisted in the opposite direction than the melon coiffures in
the catalogue. The hair in the neck is combed upwards instead of twisted and there is no bun
where the hair can be attached to stay in place.
The creator of the bust might have seen an object like the little girl on the weight
(Fig. A8) from Catalogue A and then wanted to create something similar. Instead of copying
the melon coiffure, the creator misunderstood or adjusted the hairstyle according to his or hers
skills and taste. This could be an answer to why the Vång-bust’s hair only has some
similarities with the melon coiffure.
The second hypothesis is harder to give an answer to, because of the heterogeneous material
in Catalogue B that complicated a comparative analysis. The material depicted different
aspects and types of barbarians with gave us the answer that barbarians were portrayed in
many different ways, there was not just one way. The Vång-bust was discussed based on its
bare chest, which was a way that Romans depicted especially Germanic barbarians, because
this may be the only visible attribute that could lead us to interpret the Vång-bust as barbarian.
62
Noble 2006, 143.
43
The Vång-bust’s and bust on the Mušov cauldron (Fig. B6) was also discusses as their
features on both chest and face is strikingly similar. I would not go so far as to say that that
bust from Västar Vång and the bust on the Mušov cauldron is created by the same hands, but
it is possible to suggest that they could have been created in a similar context and milieu. The
Mušov cauldron ended up in a grave outside the Roman limes.63 This would indicate that an
object like this was attractive for the barbarians and therefore were depicted them favourable
manner.
In short, the answer to my research question would be that the Vång-bust could be interpreted
as created in a hybrid context and also perhaps depicting a barbarian in a way that was
attractive as an export beyond the Roman limes. The bust may even have been created as an
object intended for export, but that is only based on a guess. These possible answers are based
on my own interpretations of both the primary material and the comparative material in the
two catalogues.
63
Aillagon 2008, 106-109.
44
5. Summary
This thesis started off with the small Roman bust found in Västra Vång in Blekinge, Sweden.
The aim was to put the bust in a wider perspective and thereby increase the understanding of
it. The research question was: What can a comparative analysis between the bust and other
artworks tell us about the origin of the bust and the context in which it was created?
Two hypotheses worked as points of departure for the comparative study. The first
hypothesis was that the Vång-bust was depicted with a so-called melon coiffure and the other
was that the bust pictures a barbarian. To make the comparative study two separated
catalogues were created, the first with mainly portraits with melon coiffures and the second
with mainly provincial minor art that depicted barbarians.
Two different methods were used in the thesis. Because my analysis was a
comparative study the obvious methodological approach was a comparative method. The
second methodological approach was the iconographical method which in short is used for the
study of imaged, which was key in the thesis. Hybridity was used as a theoretical concept for
the interpretation and discussion about the Vång-bust’s hairstyle. Hybridity is one approach to
understand and interpret crafts produced in a provincial context.
The material that was used for my thesis was presented in the chapter dedicated to my
material. The primary material, the Vång-bust, was brought up first when it was given a
detailed description that could be used in the analysis. The two catalogues were then
presented, where all the objects were given a catalogue number and information about its
dating, provenance and measurements alongside a short description about it.
Catalogue A, with melon coiffures, also came to include some other material used for
a further discussion about the usage of the twisted strands that was the basis of the melon
coiffure. Catalogue B became somewhat problematic. The material was supposed to match
the definition of what a barbarian was and also a barbarian then was depicted in a somewhat
objective manner. Some of the material in the catalogue came to exceed both these criteria.
The analysis chapter were then divided into five sections. In the first section the bust was
examined with some other materials from Västra Vång, where I suggested that the small
possible locally made bronze head might have been attached to the same vessel as the bust. In
the next section the melon coiffures from Catalogue A were discussed to get a better
45
understanding of the hairstyle. After that, in the next section, the melon coiffures and the
Vång-bust was compared. I could by that conclude that the Vång-bust’s hairstyle differed in
some vital details from the catalogue material, but would be further examined in the
discussion chapter.
In the fourth section Catalogue B was brought up and analysed. The material was
concluded to be heterogeneous with different “types” of barbarians depicted from different
aspects. Another problem came with the conclusion that there was not just one way of
depicting barbarians. In the next section this catalogue material of barbarians were compared
with the Vång-bust. In an attempt to find something similar with any of the barbarians, the
similarities the Vång-bust had with the bust on the Mušov cauldron became something to
discuss further.
In the discussion chapter the hypotheses was again brought up to see if they could be found
true or not. I discussed the possibility that the Vång-bust was depicted with a melon coiffure,
thus as a misunderstood version created in a hybrid context. I thought this as possible since it
had similarities to the melon coiffure but was missing some details to make sense, as if it had
been misinterpreted. This for me supported the idea that someone had copied the hairstyle but
missed or ignored some of the melon coiffure’s features based on of taste or skills.
The next part of the discussion about the second hypothesis was complicated and was
based on just a small part of the conclusions that could be drawn from the comparative
material. When considering the bust’s bare chest it was possible to interpret it as a barbarian
and also the striking similarities it had with the bust on the Mušov cauldron could support
that. The two busts could have been created in a similar context, because of these similarities.
In that case, the Vång-bust would have be depicted in a positive manner as I assume that the
Mušov cauldron was, since it was found in a grave on barbaric land.
In conclusion, the answer to my research question was that the Vång-bust was
created in a hybrid context, which was supported by the interpretation of the misinterpreted
melon coiffure. The bust could also be a positive depiction of a barbarian and perhaps also
created for export outside the limes.
The creation of Catalogue A and also the study of the melon coiffure that was done in this
thesis were helpful for the comparative analysis that was done. From this catalogue, an
interpretation of the melon coiffures function as a practical hairstyle was also provided as a
side result of the study. To my knowledge there has not been any earlier studied like this, that
46
has focused on usage and function of the hairstyle. It is therefore a hoped that this can be
considered a contribution to the research on the subject of Roman hairstyles.
The problems with Catalogue B need to be brought up once again. The catalogue
material could not provide such helpful conclusions for a comparative study as hoped. The
material had a wide-range and included different aspects of barbarians, that will say both
some that were depicted as submissive while others in a more positive and favourable manner.
I was also aware of the fact that some of the objects in the catalogue did not fully follow the
definition for a “barbarian”. The few conclusions drawn from the separated analysis of the
catalogue was that there was not just one was of depicting barbarians and also that the
attributes that highlighted different origins or “ethnic” belonging could be used in studying
barbarians.
It was already brought up in the discussion chapter but an interesting idea would be
to further investigate the hairstyle and the barbaric aspect together. Right at the end of this
thesis I stumbled upon an interesting article about the Greeks and a possible origin of the
melon coiffure. The author Ersilia Lopes argues that the hairstyles originated from the
Scythians and Thracians in the north.64 This might be an entrance to further study the bust and
its mysteries.
64
https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/5187618/the-northern-origin-of-the-melon-coiffure-in-classicalgreece [2014-05-28]
47
6. References
Abbaye of Daoulas1993
Rome faces the Barbarian: 1000 years to create an empire :
Abbaye of Daoulas, 19 June - 26 September 1993, Cultural
Centre Abbaye of Daoulas, Daoulas 1993.
Aillagon 2008
J. Aillagon (ed.), Rome and the Barbarians: the birth of a new
world, Skira, Milano 2008.
Ament 2003
H. Ament, Frühe Völker Europas: Thraker, Illyrer, Kelten,
Germanen, Etrusker, Italiker, Griechen, Theiss, Stuttgart 2003.
Bartman 2001
E. Bartman, ‘Hair and the artifice of Roman female adornment’,
AJA, 105:1, 2001, 1-25.
Bibliothéque nationale 1895 Bibliothèque nationale (France). Département des monnaies,
médailles et antiques, Catalogue des bronzes antiques de la
Bibliothèque nationale, Paris 1895. [Non vidi]
Biel 1985
J. Biel, Der Keltenfurst von Hochdorf, 2. Aufl., K. Theiss,
Stuttgart 1985.
Björklund 1996
E. Björklund (ed.), Roman reflections in Scandinavia, "L'Erma"
di Bretschneider, Roma 1996.
Blume 2012
C. Blume, ‘Hair, hairstyling, Greece and Rome’, in The
Encyclopedia of Ancient History, 26 October
2012.DOI: 10.1002/9781444338386.wbeah22139.
Blümel 1933
C. Blümel, Römische Bildnisse.: [Berlin, Staatl. Museen.]
[Illustr.], Berlin 1933. [Non vidi]
Carlsberg Glyptotek 1994
Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Romerske portrætter: katalog. 1, Ny
Carlsberg Glyptotek, København 1994.
Carlsberg Glyptotek 1995a Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Romerske portrætter: katalog. 2, Ny
Carlsberg Glyptotek, København 1995.
48
Carlsberg Glyptotek 1995b Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Romerske portrætter: katalog. 3, Ny
Carlsberg Glyptotek, København 1995.
Daehner 2007
J. Daehner, The Herculaneum women: history, context,
identities, J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles 2007.
D’Alleva 2005
A. D'Alleva, Methods & theories of art history, Laurence King,
London 2005.
Dillon 2010
S. Dillon, The Female Portraits Statue in the Greek World,
Cambridge University press, Cambridge 2010.
Felletti Maj 1953
B.M. Felletti Maj (ed.), Museo nazionale romano: i ritratti,
Roma 1953.
Ferris 2000
I.M. Ferris, Enemies of Rome: barbarians through Roman eyes,
Sutton, Stroud 2000.
Franken 1994
N. Franken, Aequipondia: figürliche Laufgewichte römischer
und frühbyzantinischer Schnellwaagen, Verlag und Datenbank
für Geisteswissenschaften, Alfter 1994.
Görman & Henriksson 2006 M. Görman & M. Henriksson, ’Maskbilden från Västra Vång:
ett keltiskt avtryck i Blekinges äldre järnålder?’, Fornvännen
2006, 101:3, 168-183.
Grandin 2011
L. Grandin, Järnframställning och smide under järnåldern och
medeltiden. Arkeometallurgisk undersökning av slagger från
fyra platser i Hjortsberga socken. Blekinge, Hjortsberga socken,
fornlämning 116, 121, 136. Riksantikvarieämbetet UV GAL
Rapport, Uppsala 2011:04.
Hannestad 1994
N. Hannestad, Tradition in late antique sculpture: conservation,
modernization, production, Aarhus University Press, Aarhus
1994.
Henriksson 2005
M. Henriksson, ’Unik keltisk mask påträffad i Västra Vång,
Blekinge.’, Populär arkeologi 2005 23:4, 10-11.
49
Henriksson 2006
M. Henriksson, Johannishus 1:2, Hjortberga socken, Ronneby
kommun. Särskild utredning och särskild arkeologisk
undersökning, Blekinge museum rappport 2006:8.
Henriksson 2008
M. Henriksson, Västra Vång. Hjortsberga socken, Ronneby
kommun. Särskild undersökning. Blekinge museum rapport,
Karlskrona 2008:24.
Henriksson 2011
M Henriksson, Västra Vångs by. RAÄ 116 resp. 189 Hhortberga
socken, Ronneby Kommun. Magnetometerundersökning.
Blekinge museum rapport, Karlskrona 20011:23.
Henriksson & Nilsson 2013 M. Henriksson & B.Nilsson, ’Åter till Västra Vång: korta
reflektioner kring nya järnåldersfynd i Västra Vång, mellersta
Blekinge, och deras potentiella framtid.’, Ale, 2013:4, 36-44.
Hårdh & Larsson 2003
B. Hårdh & L. Larsson (ed.), Centrality -regionality: the social
structure of southern Sweden during the Iron Age, Almqvist &
Wiksell International, Stockholm 2003.
Hölscher 2003
T. Hölscher, The language of images in Roman art, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge 2003.
Inan & Rosenbaum 1966
J. Inan & E. Rosenbaum, Roman and early Byzantine portrait
sculpture in Asia Minor, London 1966.
James & Dillon 2012
S.L. James & S. Dillon (ed.), A companion to women in the
ancient world, Wiley-Blackwell, Malden 2012.
Jiménez 2011
A. Jiménes, ‘ Pure hybridism: Late Iron Age sculpture in souch
Iberia’, World Archaeology, 43:1, 102-123.
Kleiner 1987
D.E.E. Kleiner, Roman imperial funerary altars with portraits,
Bretschneider, Roma 1987.
Kleiner 2005
D.E.E. Kleiner, Cleopatra and Rome, Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, Mass 2005.
50
Mansuelli 1961
G.A. Mansuelli, Galleria degli Uffizi: le sculture. P. 2, Istituto
Poligrafico dello Stato, Roma 1961.
Mattusch 1996
C.C. Mattusch, Classical bronzes: the art and craft of Greek and
Roman statuary, Cornell University Press, Ithaca 1996.
Musée du Louvre 1986
Musée du Louvre, Catalogue des portraits romains. T. 1,
Portraits de la République et d'époque Julio-Claudienne,
Ministère de la culture et de la communication, Paris 1986.
Musée du Louvre 1996
Musée du Louvre, Catalogue des portraits romains. T. 2, De
l'année de la guerre civile (68-69 après J.-C.) à la fin de
l'Empire, Ministère de la culture et de la communication, Paris
1996.
Museo nazional 1987
Museo nazionale romano, Museo nazionale romano. Vol. 1, Le
sculture, 9, Magazzini, i ritratti, De Luca, Roma 1987.
Noble 2006
T.F.X. Noble, (ed.), From Roman provinces to medieval
kingdoms, Routledge, London 2006.
Peška et al. 2002
J. Peška, J. Tejral, & C. von Carnap-Bornheim, Das
germanische Königsgrab von Mušov in Mähren. Teil 3, Habelt,
Bonn 2002.
Richter 1953
G.M.A. Richter, Handbook of the Greek collection., Harvard
University Press, Cambridge, Mass 1953. [Non vidi]
Rohde 1968
E. Rohde, Griechische und römische Kunst in den Staatlichen
Museen zu Berlin, Henschelverlag, Berlin 1968.
Stewart 2008
P. Stewart, The social history of Roman art, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge 2008.
Toynbee 1964
J.M.C. Toynbee, Art in Britain under the Romans, Clarendon,
London 1964.
Walker 1995
S. Walker, Greek and Roman portraits, British Museum Press,
London 1995.
51
Wallace-Hadrill 2008
A. Wallace-Hadrill, Rome’s cultural revolution, Cambride
Univeristy Press, Cambride 2008.
Walters 1899
B.H. Walters, Catalogue of the bronzes, Greek, Roman, and
Etruscan, in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities,
British Museum., London 1899.
Webster 2001
J. Webster, ‘Creolizing the Roman Provinces’, American
Journal of Archaeology, 105:2, 2001, 209-225.
Woolf 1997
G. Woolf, ‘Beyond Romans and natives’, World Archaeology,
28:3, 1997, 339-350.
52
7. Appendices
7.1 Figures:
Fig. 1 Photo by Max Jahrehorn, Blekinge museum.
53
Fig. 2 Photo by Max Jahrehorn, Blekinge museum
Fig. 3 Photo by Max Jahrehorn, Blekinge museum
54
Fig. 4 Capturing from 3D model, created by Freya Roe.
Fig. 5 Capturing from 3D model, created by Freya Roe.
55
Fig. 6 Capturing from 3D model, created by Freya Roe.
Fig. 7 Capturing from 3D model, created by Freya Roe.
56
Fig. 8 Capturing from 3D model, created by Freya Roe.
Fig. 9 Capturing from 3D model, created by Freya Roe.
57
Fig. 10 Photo: Max Jahrehorn, Blekinge museum.
Fig. 11 Photo: Max Jahrehorn, Blekinge museum.
58