|
MAIASP. 2022. No. S1 Mikhail Treister ( Some Reflections concerning
the Phiale with
the images of Heracles and Auge from the Rogozen Treasure DOI: 10.53737/2713-2021.2022.30.80.003 Access
this article (PDF File) Pages: 9—37 |
|
One of the most
important finds from the richest of the Thracian hoards, the Rogozen Treasure, is the so-called Auge
Phiale. Its chronological position is crucial for
the dating of the Hoard and had already been a point of debates. Its decoration, which consists of a mythological scene in high
relief occupying the interior of the flat bottom and a relief pattern of
alternating palmettes and lotus flowers grouped
around the central rosette on the outside is discussed, thus allow us not
only to determine the position of the vessel among the masterpieces of the
Late Classical/Early Hellenistic metalware, but
also to dwell on the genesis of the main subject of the composition. Clarifying
the chronological position of the phiale is also
extremely important for the establishment of the date, when the Treasure was hidden. Both the analysis
of the general shape, the construction and composition of the elements of the
vessel, the ornamental patterns decorating its bottom and the parallels of
the figural composition on the inner medallion do not allow dating earlier
than 350/340 BCE. Moreover, there is strong evidence that the phiale should be dated in the
chronological frames of the last quarter of the 4th — first
decades of the 3rd century BCE. The shape of the vessel and the
decoration of its bottom may suggest a somewhat earlier dating, whereas that
of the medallion — somewhat later, within the frames of the chronological
period mentioned above. Thus, it may be a further confirmation of the history
of the vessel, reconstructed on the grounds of its technological examination.
This is not the only vessel from the Rogozen
Treasure for which a dating after 340 BCE and as late as the last quarter of
the 4th/early 3rd century BCE, first decades or even
the second quarter of the 3rd century BCE has been already
proposed. Consequently, it provides another argument that the Treasure was buried much later than it was usually suggested before
(330s BCE). |
|
Key words: |
|
Received
November 27, 2022 Accepted
for publication December 12, 2022 |
|
About the author: Treister Mikhail ( E-mail: mikhailtreister@yahoo.de
|