Another kingdom with a tradition of realistic ruler portraits was Bactria,
which occupied the land between the Oxus River and the Hindu Kush (today
parts of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan). It had been part of the
Seleukid empire but won its independence in the middle of the third century
B.C. The rulers of Bactria were actually Greek, and they do not entirely
reject the Macedonian royal tradition, but like the rulers of Pontos they
preferred highly individualized and apparently realistic portrait types.
Eukratides (ruled c. 170-154 B.C.), who seized control of Bactria in 170
B.C., may have been related to the Seleukids, and that may account for his
helmet with a bull's ear and horn that resembles the leopardskin helmet
of Seleukos I (no. 49), but his features are strong and his expression determined
and stern. The Bactrian kings are depicted as middle-aged, and with their
short hair and elaborate and imposing armor, the emphasis in their portraits
is strongly martial. The coins seem designed to appeal simultaneously to
the military and to the educated Bactrian royalty who could appreciate the
divine attributes.
Finally, realistic portraiture made an appearance where it might least have
been expected, in the last coins of the Macedonian kingdom. The portraits
of its last king, Perseus (c. 212-168 B.C), have few of the idealizing qualities
of the Macedonian royal tradition. Although he liked to be known as a descendant
of Alexander and although he has Alexander's tousled hair and upward gaze,
his unprepossessing profile, weak mouth, and wispy beard rob him of any
of Alexander's heroic qualities. When Perseus finally surrendered to Rome,
Macedonia disintegrated into four powerless republics, and soon afterward
the last remnants of the Macedonian kingdom of Alexander the Great were
absorbed by the Romans.
The traditions of portraiture established in these Hellenistic coins, both
the idealized tradition based upon portraits of Alexander and the realistic
tradition of later Hellenistic coinage, provided the basis for the ruler
portraiture of the late Roman republic and the Roman empire. The image of
Alexander himself would be evoked for its heroic qualities and for its associations
with dominion over the East. The conventions of the divine ruler portrait
would be adapted to the propaganda that served the Roman cult of the emperor.
And the realism in Hellenistic portraiture would inspire the "veristic"
tradition of the late republic, which would periodically resurface in the
portraiture of the empire.
(Continues...)
[LU Home]
| [Bearers of Meaning] | [Contents]
| [Essays] | [Catalogue]
| [Glossary]
All contents copyright (c) 1996.
Lawrence University
All rights reserved.