Herakleia Pontika’dan Bir Portre / A Portrait from Heracleia Pontica

In this study, a portrait found in Heraclea Pontica and exhibited in Karadeniz Ereğli Museum is discussed. In the inventory record, it is written that the portrait was found in Kayabaşı and it was delivered to the museum by the authorities of Alemdar Primary School in 01.09.1999. The head, which was...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Ramazan ÖZGAN
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Zeliha Gider Büyüközer 2022-01-01
Series:Arkhaia Anatolika
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.arkhaiaanatolika.org/Makale.asp?dil=0&sid=89&did=18
Description
Summary:In this study, a portrait found in Heraclea Pontica and exhibited in Karadeniz Ereğli Museum is discussed. In the inventory record, it is written that the portrait was found in Kayabaşı and it was delivered to the museum by the authorities of Alemdar Primary School in 01.09.1999. The head, which was carved from high-quality white marble, was made separately to be placed on a statue. There are fractures and deficiencies in the portrait. The hair and beard of the person depicted almost from the front, and especially the wrinkles on the eyebrows, eyes and forehead, show that the person portrayed is of mature age. In addition to the physiognomic appearance of the portrait, the shape of the hair-beard, facial and forehead skin wrinkles show that a person who has lived (privat) is portrayed. Because, the portrait of Heraclea is depicted differently from the ideal appearance of the heads of the gods statues, such as Zeus, Hades and Poseidon. When the portrait is viewed from the front, the left side of the face is wider and more protruding than the right, and this should be related to the display of the sculpture and its main aspect. In other words, the owner of the portrait was probably portrayed as facing slightly to his right and looking to his right. In order to better understand the style characteristics of the portrait preserved in the Ereğli Museum, it was compared with the contemporary examples, and the parallels and interactions in the Roman portrait art were determined. In this direction, chronologically similar examples of the portrait were examined in detail, the similarities and differences between the Ereğli portrait and its contemporary examples were discussed, and a suggestion was made for the date of the portrait. In addition, the portrait was evaluated in terms of its physiognomic features, and the person it could belong to was tried to be determined.
ISSN:2651-4664