Chapter IV

The Sculptures from the Eastern Great Baths: Old and New Finds

by Thomas M. Weber-Karyotakis
with reading and comments on related Greek inscriptions
by Pierre-Louis Gatier

Fortunately, the Severan extension of the eastern baths [1] is fairly well known thanks to excavation by the local Department of Antiquities under the direction of ‘Aïda Nagawy in the mid 80s of the past century and intensive French studies by Jacques Seigne and Thomas Lepaon:[2] he so-called northern hall, a composite pillared-colonnaded basilica, achieved an importance as an assembly hall where sculptures were gathered in honor of the political elites. It became a fine collection of older marble sculptures mixed with contemporary ones, encircling a mythological program of Dionysiac character with honorific statuary.

Unfortunately, the compound adjacent to the greatest baths of the city has been excavated only in part, more systematically than before just from 2016 onward. Even though the hitherto finds of epigraphic [3] and sculptural finds are extremely rich and encouraging, all efforts of analytic research remain preliminary at present. Until now, more than 30 statue bases, predominantly carrying Greek inscriptions [4], have come to light during the Jordanian salvage excavations of 1984, some of them standing still in situ. Others have been moved in the meantime to the terraçe in front of the museum or elsewhere in the antiquities area. Most of them are dedications by the urban authorities or ἡ πόλις, others have been donated by notable individuals. Many inscriptions refer to donations of statues by the urban community in general [5], while few of them mention the specific subject: The torso of the Lykeian Dionysos (cat.-no. 2; cat.-no. 3), for instance, might be attributed to an inscribed statue base naming this god. It still today stands in situ in front of a pier west of the exedra.[6] A “horned” altar was reworked in order to serve as a base for a marble statue of “the Dithyrambe, son of Semele, Dionysos, the master of the grapes.”[7] Two other cylindrical bases [8] carried statues of Satyrs, one of them in the company of a Hermaphrodite. At least one of these bases may be associated with the dancing satyrs cat.-no. 5; cat.-no. 6. Also attested is the display of a statue of Herakles [9] on a re-used base of rectangular plan, but none of the sculptural fragments described below can yet be associated with it. The same is true for a base which attests the personification of Hypnos.[10] One of the Gerasene sculptural marble fragments (cat-no. 6) bears the signature of an Alexandrian artist, confirming his personal authorship by stating he “made this by himself”, engraved on its plinth. The subject of the sculpture is a well known type of a dancing Muse. The corresponding inscriptional base has been dislocated during the early 20th century and been re-used in the façade of one of the shops in the Circessian suq. The base provides an exact date, 118/119 AD, for the donation of the statue. Another precise chronological term is provided by the colossal statue fragment of Aphrodite (cat.-no. 3), the inscription of which preserved on the pedestal gives the year 154 AD, approximately 20th March as a terminus post quem non.

Other mythological subjects without any correspondence in the epigraphic corpus are a head fragment of Zeus (cat.-no. 1) and the shoulder fragment of a peplophoros, perhaps part of a Nike (cat.-no. 7). During official events held at night, several figural torch holders (lampadophoroi or lychnophoroi)[11] enlightened the hall. Despite these three hitherto known examples were offered by notables in equestrian rank in the years 247/248 AD, it was not yet possible to rule these torchbearers out in the sculptural material.

Of no less great historical importance are the honorific donations by individuals. There is the cylindrical base of a statue representing C. Allius Fuscianus, the legate Augusti pro pretore, designated consul, donated by Marcus Antonius Gemellus, the cornicular of the imperial procurator of Arabia Vibius Celer.[12] This high ranked administrative officer belonged to the senatorial class and thus was authorized to wear the calcei senatorii as seen at the togatus statue cat.-no 8 which is dated below by stylistic criteria to the mid or third quarter of the 2nd century AD. Two other inscriptions witness the presence of the honored C. Allius Fuscianus at Gerasa by the end of the reign of Antoninus Pius to the early years of Marcus Aurelius. He is another candidate for the identification of one of the senatorial toga statues and his effigy might have been shifted later from the area of the odeion / bouleuterion or the nearby agora / forum into the eastern baths.[13] In later time the base received a secondary epigram which states that the base was re-used by demand of the provincial governor Domitius Antoninus to carry (probably) a statue of Diocletian [14]as a counterpart of a statue of Maximian.[15] This portrait gallery presented further imperial portraiture including the statues of Emperor Caracalla [16]and of the provincial governor Gaius Carbonius Statilius Severus Hadrianus.[17] The only portrait head found up today in the northern hall does not help further in the discourse: It is evident that the portrayed matron is neither the empress herself nor a known female member the imperial court. The only statement which can be made at present that the effigy isthat of a noble lady, possibly of local origin, of Severian age (cat.-no. 14).

This complex statuary program compares to similar structures and composite arrangements in the Oriental provinces: Similar assemblages, partly re-using older statuary during Byzantine times in the columned basilical halls, are known at Apamea, Palmyra / Tadmor (so-called baths of Zenobia), Berytos / Beirut, Tyros (“sea-baths”), Philippopolis / Shahba, Skythopolis / Beisan, Bostra, Emmatha / Hammat Gader, Gadara / Umm Qais. In some of these cases, a rather similar thematic interaction between portrait statues and those with mythological subjects can be observed, especially at Tyros and Palmyra. The still partly excavated semicircular annex in the northern hall at Jerash (Fig. III. 36; Fig. III. 48) will certainly reveal further evidence to specify the thematic and political nature of this sculptural program. Such representative structures combined with semicircular annexes present striking similarities with the “Kaisersaal” in four large baths at Ephesos and might contribute by new finds to the discussion on the function in the frame of the imperial cult.[18]

Fragment of a Head of Zeus / Figs. IV. 1-4

In contrast to the bearded head, formerly identified with Zeus Asklepios [19] the present fragment distinguishes by its regular, almost boring arrangement of coiffure and beard as well as by the thin fillet running around the base of the scull. The latter is much different from the thick corona tortillia worn by Asklepios of the Guistini and related types [20] but finds an analogy at the bearded head of Zeus from Paneas / Caesarea Philippi (Fig. IV. 5; Fig. IV. 6).[21] The flame-shaped hair tufts with enrolled tips, repeated schematically as a trained feature by the sculptor, compare quite well with two bearded heads of oriental provenance: The bust of Sarapis from Antioch [22] and a head of Sarapis-“Ammon” formerly in the New York art market.[23]

Fig. IV. 1 Fragment of a Head (Zeus-Asklepios?), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Artemis-temple,without inv.-no. (Cat.-no.1).

Fig. IV. 2 Fragment of a Head (Zeus-Asklepios?), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Artemis-temple,without inv.-no. (Cat.-no.1).

Fig. IV. 3 Fragment of a Head (Zeus-Asklepios?), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Artemis-temple,without inv.-no. (Cat.-no.1).

Fig. IV. 4 Fragment of a Head (Zeus-Asklepios?), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Artemis-temple,without inv.-no. (Cat.-no.1).

Fig. IV. 5 Bearded head of Zeus-Asklepios, Bait Shemmesh, Excavation storage, from Paneas / Caesarea Philippi.

Fig. IV. 6 Bearded head of Zeus-Asklepios, Bait Shemmesh, Excavation storage, from Paneas / Caesarea Philippi.

· [Cat.-no. 1] Fragment of a Head of Zeus

Fig. IV. 1 Fragment of a Head (Zeus-Asklepios?), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Artemis-temple,without inv.-no. (Cat.-no.1).

Fig. IV. 2 Fragment of a Head (Zeus-Asklepios?), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Artemis-temple,without inv.-no. (Cat.-no.1).

Fig. IV. 3 Fragment of a Head (Zeus-Asklepios?), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Artemis-temple,without inv.-no. (Cat.-no.1).

Fig. IV. 4 Fragment of a Head (Zeus-Asklepios?), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Artemis-temple,without inv.-no. (Cat.-no.1).

Fig. IV. 5 Bearded head of Zeus-Asklepios, Bait Shemmesh, Excavation storage, from Paneas / Caesarea Philippi.

Fig. IV. 6 Bearded head of Zeus-Asklepios, Bait Shemmesh, Excavation storage, from Paneas / Caesarea Philippi.

· [Cat.-no. 1] Fragment of a Head of Zeus

Fragmented head of Dionysos, type Lykeios Corinth / Figs. IV. 7-10

The detail of the fillet of the vine wreath with pines running underneath the lower border of the coiffure across the forehead finds nummerous analogies in the Dionysiac Greco-Roman marble sculptures from the Middle East: It can be found at the Lykeios-type head fragment from Gadara [24], the god’s effigy from Skythopolis [25], three double-herms Dionysos-Ariadne with the same provenience [26], two marble heads from Caesarea Maritima (one of them being a herm)[27], a head in [28] probably coming from Heliopolis / Baalbek, two fragments from Paneas / Caesarea Philippi [29]and a beautiful wreathed head worked for insertion from Tyre, now in Copenhague.[30] It is thus a rather ubiquitous attribute – not only for the god himself, but also for the attendants of his thiasos as exemplified by the basalt frieze coming from Seeia / Sî’ in the Damaskus National Museum.[31] Consequently, this detail does not push much forward with a trial to determine the archetype of the Gerasene fragment and its importance to the city.

In respect of the summary workmanship, the ribbon crossing the forehead and the type of vine-pine fruit wreath, the best parallels to confront the Gerasa fragment are provided by two more completely preserved Dionysos heads from Palmyra (Fig. IV. 11)[32] and Tyre (Fig. IV. 12).[33] Both display close similarities not only in the said attributes but also in their styles. Traces of the god’s right hand laid upon the skull assigns these heads to the statuary type in the tradition of Apollon Lykeios [34], which is named after his best replica from Corinth. According to D. Wielgosz the Palmyrene head does not fit in size to the torso of the Dionysiac group [35] representing the drunken god leaning on a Satyr, but it provides an imagination how the Gerasa head can be restored as a full-sized statue. As far as technical and stylistic details are still visible at the fragment from Gerasa, the Palmyra replica might slightly antedate, while the Tyre head must definitely be attributed to a later date, toward the last decades of the 2nd century AD. The vertically abraded surface of the Gerasa head for fitting the rear head by doweling is paralleled by a fragmented Dionysos-head coming from Paneas / Caesarea Philippi.[36]

Fig. IV. 7 Fragmented head of Dionysos-Lykeios (type Corinth), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Zeus-temple, inv.-no. G 1187 (cat.-no. 2).

Fig. IV. 8 Fragmented head of Dionysos-Lykeios (type Corinth), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Zeus-temple, inv.-no. G 1187 (cat.-no. 2).

Fig. IV. 9 Fragmented head of Dionysos-Lykeios (type Corinth), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Zeus-temple, inv.-no. G 1187 (cat.-no. 2).

Fig. IV. 10 Fragmented head of Dionysos-Lykeios (type Corinth), Jerash, Department of Antiquities, storage room of the office beside the Zeus-temple, inv.-no. G 1187 (cat.-no. 2).

Fig. IV. 11 Two marble heads of the Dionysos Lykeios type Corinth, comparable to the Gerasa fragment Cat.-no. 2: Fig. 11: from Tyre, Paris, Louvre, inv.-no. MNC 1101 / MND 2227 / MA 2669 / MA 3542

Fig. IV. 12 Fig. 12: From Palmyra, found near the tetrapylon of the colonnaded street, formerly Tadmor, Archaeological Museum, inv.-no. 4.

Fig. IV. 13 Head fragment of Dionysos in the Lykeios pose from Paneas / Caesarea Philippi.

· [Cat.-no. 2] Fragmented head of Dionysos, type Lykeios Corinth

Naked male torso, Dionysos of Lykeios Type / Figs. IV. 14-17

The torso follows in the movement of the legs and in the modelling of the abdominal zone the relaxed stance of idealized male representations introduced in the 5th century BC by Polycleitus. E. S. Friedland’s identification as Dionysos of the Lykeios type, with the hand of his raised right am laid upon his head, should given preference. Especially, the soft transitions between the anatomical parts such as the serrated muscles of the abdominal plate support such an assignation. The head fragment from Gerasa (cat.-no. 2) represents the same sculptural type, and it should be questioned whether both fragments from the eastern baths originally belonged together. To the present stage of knowledge only one inscriptional statue base of cubic shape found in the eastern baths mentions Dionysos.[37]

Statues of the wine god occur frequently as decorations of large public baths especially in northern Africa:[38] The thermes at Cyrene attest a pair of the god’s statues. Even three of them have been displayed at the same time in the baths of Antoninus Pius at Carthago, in the thermes at Iol Caesarea / Cherchel and at Uthina.[39] The oriental provinces share in general the preference of Dionysiac themes in the sculptural decoration of the baths with the northern African, but often in combination with figures from the ambience of Aphrodite (cf. cat.-no. 4).

The same figural type of Dionysos Lykeios is preserved, in more complete condition, in specimens from Tyre [40], Askalon [41], and Caesarea Maritima.[42] As shown above, a number of preserved Dionysiac head fragments may also be attributed to the Lykeios scheme. Smaller repetitions or variations of the type are sometimes altered in function to serve as table legs (trapezophoroi)[43], as it is also recorded in the indigenous basalt sculpture from the southern Syrian volcanic zone.[44]

The occurrence of the statuary type in minor art such as figurines modeled out of terracotta from Gerasa / Jerash (Fig. IV. 18)[45] and cast in bronze from a villa of Eram / Wadi Ram (Fig. IV. 19)[46] prove the popularity of Dionysos of the Lykeios scheme in Roman Arabia.

Fig. IV. 14 Torso of an ideal nude male statue identified as Dionysos in the pose of Apollon Lykeios, Jerash, Archaeological Museum, without inv.-no. (cat.-no. 3).

Fig. IV. 15 Torso of an ideal nude male statue identified as Dionysos in the pose of Apollon Lykeios, Jerash, Archaeological Museum, without inv.-no. (cat.-no. 3).

Fig. IV. 16 Torso of an ideal nude male statue identified as Dionysos in the pose of Apollon Lykeios, Jerash, Archaeological Museum, without inv.-no. (cat.-no. 3).

Fig. IV. 17 Torso of an ideal nude male statue identified as Dionysos in the pose of Apollon Lykeios, Jerash, Archaeological Museum, without inv.-no. (cat.-no. 3).

Fig. IV. 18 Youthful god in the pose of Apollon Lykeios in minor art from Provincia Arabia: Fig. 18 Terracotta figurine from Gerasa / Jerash, Amman - Ras al-’Ain, Jordan Museum, inv. J 2246

Fig. IV. 19 Bronze figurine, found in the cistern of the temple of Allat at Eram / Wadi Ram, Aqaba, Archaeological Museum, without inv.-no.

· [Cat.-no. 3] Naked male torso, Dionysos of Lykeios Type

Lower part of the standing nude Aphrodite in colossal format, Type Aphrodite Troas / Figs. IV. 20-25

The Aphrodite fragment uncovered in a destruction horizon during the excavation of 2016 is a remarkable piece due to the detailed inscription which informs about the precise date of inauguration on 20. Xandikos 216 Gerasene era (= 154 AD, approximately 20. March). It was donated by a local priest named Demetrius, a stepson of a certain Asklepiodorus, together with the base, the apse, the altar and the hestia which must be a cultic fire place for burning sacrifices. These devices strongly suggest its function as a cult statue. It is probable that its original location was another rather than the place where it has been found. The finding circumstances raise hope that further pieces belonging to the same statue might be find in future excavations. The format of the preserved torso amounting to approximately two-and-a-half life size (164.3 cm) justifies its assignment as a colossal figure. It consists of imported white marble of still unknown quarry origin. The sculptural quality is good all in the round but not outstanding. The surfaces are carefully abraded and the lack of drilling work is obvious. It is a work of the early Antonine period but it is – apart from a certain schematism in the arrangement of the cloth’s drapery – not significant enough to accentuate more precisely the artistic sculptural style of that time in the Oriental provinces.

The action motive which implies a surprised shameful attitude toward a hidden spectator is generally assigned as “pudica”. In the present case, various elements have been derived from the sculptural type of the so-called Capitolina and the Venus Medici. The towel drawn upward to cover the genital coincides with the Aphrodite by Menophantos (Fig. IV. 26)[47] and some related statues.[48] According to the Greek signature, the celebrated Mentophanos statue depends from “the Aphrodite in the Troade”, obviously a 2nd century BC lost masterpiece. The art historic status of the Troas Aphrodite is controversially disputed: While some scholars classify it as an autonomous type, others evaluate it as an eclectic contamination of the Capitolina and Medici, and again others as a copist variation which traces back to the Capitolina.[49] A fairly close replica of the newly found Gerasa torso, but mirror-wise inverted and with both arms restored in modern times, is a marble Aphrodite in the British Museum, found in 1775 by Gavin Hamilton in a bath at Ostia.[50]At present, a full scholarly evaluation is not yet possible: There a good chances to expect further fragments of the same statue in future excavations. The above preliminary classification may suffice so far to theoretically restore the missing upper portions with head and arms of the newly found colossal statue.

Fig. IV. 20 Lower part of a colossal standing Aphrodite with inscriptional dedication in Greek on the frontal and right lateral plinth, to her right side a nude Eros riding a dolphin. A certain Demetrios, step son of Askleiodoros donated this statue for the welfare of Emperor Antoninus Pius on circa 20th March 154 AD, found on May 7th, 2016 in the eastern baths. Jerash, Archaeological Museum, without inv.-no. (cat.-no. 4).

Fig. IV. 21 Lower part of a colossal standing Aphrodite with inscriptional dedication in Greek on the frontal and right lateral plinth, to her right side a nude Eros riding a dolphin. A certain Demetrios, step son of Askleiodoros donated this statue for the welfare of Emperor Antoninus Pius on circa 20th March 154 AD, found on May 7th, 2016 in the eastern baths. Jerash, Archaeological Museum, without inv.-no. (cat.-no. 4).

Fig. IV. 22 Lower part of a colossal standing Aphrodite with inscriptional dedication in Greek on the frontal and right lateral plinth, to her right side a nude Eros riding a dolphin. A certain Demetrios, step son of Askleiodoros donated this statue for the welfare of Emperor Antoninus Pius on circa 20th March 154 AD, found on May 7th, 2016 in the eastern baths. Jerash, Archaeological Museum, without inv.-no. (cat.-no. 4).

Fig. IV. 23 Lower part of a colossal standing Aphrodite with inscriptional dedication in Greek on the frontal and right lateral plinth, to her right side a nude Eros riding a dolphin. A certain Demetrios, step son of Askleiodoros donated this statue for the welfare of Emperor Antoninus Pius on circa 20th March 154 AD, found on May 7th, 2016 in the eastern baths. Jerash, Archaeological Museum, without inv.-no. (cat.-no. 4).

Fig. IV. 24 Inscriptions on the frontal (Fig. 20) and the right lateral faces of the plinth carrying a colossal standing Aphrodite, found on May 7th, 2016 in the eastern baths. Jerash, Archaeological Museum, without inv.-no. (cat.-no. 4).

Fig. IV. 25 Inscriptions on the frontal (Fig. 20) and the right lateral faces of the plinth carrying a colossal standing Aphrodite, found on May 7th, 2016 in the eastern baths. Jerash, Archaeological Museum, without inv.-no. (cat.-no. 4).

Fig. IV. 26 Marble statue of Aphrodite, according to the inscription modeled after a template in the Troas, signed by Menophantos, Rome, Museo Nazionale Romano, Palazzo Massimo.

· [Cat.-no. 4] Lower part of the standing nude Aphrodite in colossal format, Type Aphrodite Troas

Pedestal and base from a Muse, variant of the type of the dancing Muse Miletus / Figs. IV. 27-28

E. Friedland dated the fragment by stylistic criteria to the second half of the 2nd century AD which contradicts the epigraphic information. She convincingly compared the Gerasene fragment with the dancing Muse standing atop a rocky outcrop from the Baths of Faustina at Miletus.[51] This statuary type, carefully studied by C. Schneider, is known today from 18 copies, some of them shown on relief. In fact, a variant of this statuary type in the Museum at Sevilla (Fig. IV. 30)[52], found in the baths of Munigua, provides the best comparison in order to understand how the present fragment should be restored: The divine dancer lifts the right leg bending the knee, raising her jamb and kicking her foot freely above the rocky ground. The position of the left foot and the drapery coincides well with the Gerasene plinth. Rather similar is another replica in pose and drapery, interpreted as a nymph, from the horti Pallentiani at Rome.[53]

Fig. IV. 27 Marble pedestal from a Muse, variant of the type of the dancing Muse Miletos, with a signature pannel by the Alexandriam sculptor Antoneinos, son of Antiochos, Amman, Jordan Museum (Ras al- ‘Ain), inv.-no. unknown (cat.-no. 5).

Fig. IV. 28 Marble pedestal from a Muse, variant of the type of the dancing Muse Miletos, with a signature pannel by the Alexandriam sculptor Antoneinos, son of Antiochos, Amman, Jordan Museum (Ras al- ‘Ain), inv.-no. unknown (cat.-no. 5).

Fig. IV. 29 Inscribed limestone base with the dedication of a statue by Lysias, son of Aristion Moirenos, signed by the Alexandrian sculptor Antoneionos, son of Antiochos, Jerash, in modern re-use in the Circessian suq (cat.-no.5).

Fig. IV. 30 Left the more complete statue of a dancing Muse from the Roman baths at Munigua, Sevilla, Museo Arqueologico Provincial, compared with the Gerasa fragment (cat.-no.5).

· [Cat.-no. 5] Pedestal and base from a Muse, variant of the type of the dancing Muse Miletus

Torso of a Satyr, type “with the fruit scarf and panther” carrying infant Dionysus in his hand / Figs. IV. 31-35

In terms of art history, the Gerasene specimen has to be classified as a variation of the statuary type of the “Satyr with fruit scarf and panther” which is preserved in 14 more or less exact copies, one of them in the Villa Albani collection at Rome [54], and at least six replicas of the head. In general line, at all these copies the young main actor moves in exactly the pose of the Gerasene counterpart, like him only clad by the oblique, sash-shaped goatskin filled with grapes and other crops. With his right hand the Albani Satyr holds a bunch of grapes high above his turned head in order to tease a small panther sitting with one attacking paw to his right side. The haunting stick held in his left hand is a Renaissance restoration, influenced by a wrongly conjectured replica in the Galleria degli Uffici at Florence.

Due to the addition of the Dionysus child, the Gerasa group should be attributed as one of numerous variations of this late-Hellenistic statuary type. It finds a fairly exact analogy in a Roman sculpture exhibited at the British Museum (Fig. IV. 36).[55]

As stated by R. A. Smith in 1904, the hybrid idea to enrich the London specimen by addition of the divine infant has been inspired by late Classical Greek Art, which introduced this topic thru the masterwork of Hermes and Dionysus by Praxiteles during the 4th century BC to a greater international audience. The London Satyr, in pose and attributes congruous to the Gerasa fragments, is waving the pedum above his head. Again, this motif is a modern restoration but supported by parts of the stick preserved in the antique portions of the hand and by the analogy of a better preserved statue at Naples. The truncated massive object held by the Gerasene Satyr in his preserved right hand (Fig. IV. 34) looks, indeed, more like root-stock rather than the stalk of a grape. The lower end of the pedum is preserved on the right shoulder and thus the curved part must have directed upward.

A similar figural marble group of a Satyr holding the Dionysos babe was probably exhibited in one of the Phoenician harbour towns as well as in the capital of the later Kyrrhestike. A fragment figuring the child grasping a bunch of grapes and sitting on an extended palm of a hand is preserved in the storages of the Beirut National Museum.[56] The exact provenance of it could not yet be determined. This specimen preserves the full Dionysos boy including his head. The second parallel example comes from the theatre in Kyrrhos / Nebi Huri [57] and shows the child with missing head and extended right arm sitting with a bunch of grapes in headlock-gesture on the palm of the dancing Satyr. Here, however, the motif is mirror-wise inverted which concludes that those genres could have been exhibited in corresponding groups (cf. here cat.-no. 7), as produced by sculptor ateliers at Aphrodisias in Asia Minor.

In conclusion, it should be stated that the marble statuary group from the eastern baths of Gerasa displays a somehow jocular but rather unpretentious genre of the Dionysiac circle, developed in late Hellenistic art, copied and varied by Roman sculptors and widely spread by numerous variations all over the Oriental Roman provinces. Satyrs and Maenads, sometimes in the company of their divine lord Dionysos, populated the public and private spaces in Syrian cities, such as theatres See, for instance, two fragments of the renowned group Satyr attacking the Hermaphrodite from the theater at Daphne / Harbiyeh near Antioch at the Princeton University Art Museum (inv. 2000-49) and in the Hatay Archaeological Museum at Antakya (inv. 1327): II, 173–174 nos. 161–163 pls. 13-14; LIMC V, 297 no. 630 s.v. Hermaphroditos (A. Ajootian); Ajootian 1997, 233; T. Najbjerg, in: Padgett, 212–214 no. 68 (with figs.);[58], baths [59], street monuments [60] and the gardens of private villas.[61] The occurrence of such a theme in a representative hall attached to the Great Baths of the Syrian Decapolis is thus not unexpected. The Gerasa Satyr was displayed with a counterpart (cat.-no. 7) rather similar in size, movement and attributes. It should be remembered at that point, that two inscribed statue bases from the northern hall of the Gerasa eastern baths refer to the dedication of statues of Satyrs donated by the municipality (pólis).[62] The specific intellectual considerations inaugurating the exhibit of such a statue in the eastern baths of Gerasa are difficult to determine. Widely unaffected by the imperial crisis quaking the centre of the empire by the mid 2nd century AD, the Gerasenes in the far off province of Arabia still enjoyed toward the end of this century the benefits of the Pax Romana. Decorative statuary like the Satyr holding the Dionysos boy in a public context may reflect the hedonistic life-style of the citizen in leisure and commonwealth. The ancient spectator associated the fruits abundantly gushing from the fold of the scarf worn by a kind of “civilized” Satyr as a symbol for benefits of the apparently endless aureum aetas (“Golden Age”) under the auspices of Rome.

Fig. IV. 31 Fragments of the dancing Satyr with fruit scarf and Dionysos babe (cat.-no.6).

Fig. IV. 32 Fragments of the dancing Satyr with fruit scarf and Dionysos babe (cat.-no.6).

Fig. IV. 33 Fragments of the dancing Satyr with fruit scarf and Dionysos babe (cat.-no.6).

Fig. IV. 34 Fragments of the dancing Satyr with fruit scarf and Dionysos babe (cat.-no.6).

Fig. IV. 35 Fragments of the dancing Satyr with fruit scarf and Dionysos babe (cat.-no.6).

Fig. IV. 36 The Farnese Collection dancing Satyr with fruit scarf and Diosysos babe, London, British Museum (Courtesy by the Trustees of the British Museum).

· [Cat.-no. 6] Torso of a Satyr, type “with the fruit scarf and panther” carrying infant Dionysus in his hand

Upper body of a dancing Satyr, type “with the fruit scarf and panther” / Figs. IV. 37-40

Even though its fragmentary state of representation, this torso can accurately been restored as a counterpart of cat.-no. 6 corresponding to it in size, movement and attributes. The cloth hanging over its right breast is the lower end of the scarf filled with fruits slung around the lowered arm. Again, the Villa Albani replica [63] provides the best imagination how the present fragment should be conjectured. The present author does not see any contradiction by its stylistic features to assume, that both cat.-no. 6 and cat.- no. 7 had been imported by a workshop in Asia Minor, possibly from Aphrodisias where the subject of the Satyr was en vogue in sculptor’s ateliers [64], to adorn the eastern baths as a corresponding pair.

A similar statue of a young Satyr but without a fruit scarf, comparable to the two Gerasa specimen by his spiral movement in the dance and teasing the panther with his hunting stick, has been unearthed at Caesarea Maritima.[65] A badly mutilated torso of a nude male person raising the (lost) right arm (lost) high from the arm pit over the head from Bosra [66] may probably restored as another dancing Satyr in a similar attitude.

Fig. IV. 37 Fragment of d dancing Satyr with fruit scarf (cat.-no.7).

Fig. IV. 38 Fragment of d dancing Satyr with fruit scarf (cat.-no.7).

Fig. IV. 39 Fragment of d dancing Satyr with fruit scarf (cat.-no.7).

Fig. IV. 40 Fragment of d dancing Satyr with fruit scarf (cat.-no.7).

Fig. IV. 41 Torso of a Nike / Victory from Laodikeia ad marem / Ladhaqiyeh, Vienna, Art Historic Museum, inv. I 644, from the Collection of Georg Ritter von Millosičz.

Fig. IV. 42 - 43 Torso of a gliding Nike (42), limestone, from the terrace of market basilica at Gadara, Umm Qais, Museum, Inv.-No. 15. Base with inscribed globe and the feet of a gliding Nike (43), made “under the care of Amreios son of Gaianos”, most probably from Gerasa, Amman, Rihani Collection.

· [Cat.-no. 7] Upper body of a dancing Satyr, type “with the fruit scarf and panther”

**Left shoulder of a peplophoros / Figs. IV. 44-46**

Representations of maiden and women dressed in the Doric peplos originate in the art of Archaic and Classical Greece.[67] As a classizistic element this garment achieved wide popularity in the retrospective or eclectic Roman imperial styles [68], well known to the spectators by numerous copies of Greek opera nobilia such as the Karyatides of the Erechtheion.[69]. An original of these Greek masterpieces stranded as a spoil of the Persian wars far in the oriental realm: The Severe-Style original Penelope or Aphrodite in the Gardens, known from various later copies, has been found in the Great King’s palace precinct at Persepolis.[70]Roman sculpture in the oriental provinces preserves only few parallel examples such as fragments from Antiochia [71], Daphne [72], Seleukeia Pieria [73], Byblos [74] and Apamea. [75] These analogies, however, are not very instructive for the interpretation of the present Gerasene fragment. The classical peplos appears on various marble statues of Nike [76]and Nemesis [77]of Syrian provenance. The torso of a gliding Nike from Laodikeia ad marem / Ladhaqiyeh (Fig. IV. 41)[78] seems to be a mediator between Greek and provincial Syrian art: It seems that this sculptor, trained in Greco-Roman marble working, developed his own style which is so significant for numerous Victory figures carved by local craftsmen out of the indigenous limestone and basalt.[79]
A lime-stone torso at Umm Qais (Fig. IV. 42)[80]. and the inscribed globe with the feet of a gliding Nike in the Rihani Collection Amman (Fig. IV. 43)[81], most probably being used as a central acroterion on the top of a pediment, are typical representatives of this type of sculptures in the Decapolis.

Fig. IV. 44 Shoulder and neck fragment of a peplophoros (cat.-no.8).

Fig. IV. 45 Shoulder and neck fragment of a peplophoros (cat.-no.8).

Fig. IV. 46 Shoulder and neck fragment of a peplophoros (cat.-no.8).

· [Cat.-no. 8] Left shoulder of a peplophoros

Fig. IV. 47 Togatus wearing the senatorian shoes, Amman, Jordan Museum (Ras al-‘Ain), inv.-no. J. 262 (cat.-no.9).

Fig. IV. 48 Togatus wearing the senatorian shoes, Amman, Jordan Museum (Ras al-‘Ain), inv.-no. J. 262 (cat.-no.9).

Fig. IV. 49 Togatus wearing the senatorian shoes, Amman, Jordan Museum (Ras al-‘Ain), inv.-no. J. 262 (cat.-no.9).

Fig. IV. 50 Togatus wearing the senatorian shoes, Amman, Jordan Museum (Ras al-‘Ain), inv.-no. J. 262 (cat.-no.9).

· [Cat.-no. 9] Torso of a togatus of senatorial rank

Fig. IV. 51 Togatus, Jerash, Archaeological Museum, no inv.-no. (cat.-no. 10).

Fig. IV. 52 Togatus, Jerash, Archaeological Museum, no inv.-no. (cat.-no. 10).

Fig. IV. 53 Togatus, Jerash, Archaeological Museum, no inv.-no. (cat.-no. 10).

Fig. IV. 54 Togatus, Jerash, Archaeological Museum, no inv.-no. (cat.-no. 10).

· [Cat.-no. 10] Torso of a togatus.

Fig. IV. 55 Various fragments of a togatus, possibly belonging to cat.-no. 10, Jerash, Department of Antiquities, not found in 2011. (cat.-no. 11).

· [Cat.-no. 11] Various fragments of a togatus

Fig. IV. 56 Pedestal with lower part of a togatus wearing shoes of equestrian rank Jerash, Archaeological Museum, no inv.-no. (cat.-no. 12).

Fig. IV. 57 Pedestal with lower part of a togatus wearing shoes of equestrian rank Jerash, Archaeological Museum, no inv.-no. (cat.-no. 12).

Fig. IV. 58 Pedestal with lower part of a togatus wearing shoes of equestrian rank Jerash, Archaeological Museum, no inv.-no. (cat.-no. 12).

Fig. IV. 59 Pedestal with lower part of a togatus wearing shoes of equestrian rank Jerash, Archaeological Museum, no inv.-no. (cat.-no. 12).

· [Cat.-no. 12] Pedestal with lower part of a togatus of equestrian rank

Various fragments of a togatus

The torsi and fragments (cat.-no. 9; cat.-no. 10; cat.-no. 11; cat.-no. 12; cat.-no. 13) belonged to at least three or four togati. They have been treated in length in various articles by E. A. Friedland. Her precise descriptions have been quoted litterarily by the the present author. For this reason, the following commentary confines itself to few additional remarks.

The togatus was the standard type of a male Roman draped portrait statue in civilian attire which had been developed from the humble Republican toga exigua at Rome during the early Augustean era, reserved for persons holding the Roman citizenship. These standard Roman honorific statues had been worked sometimes in order to be mounted with separately chiseled portrait heads. Others, like the Gerasa examples were monolithic, worked out of one single block of marble each. The imperial toga was worn over the tunic and consisted of a segmental cut piece of white linen or wool. The curved part always marks the lower border. When correctly draped, the textile formed distinctive parts such as sinus, balteus, umbo and lacinia, the terminology of the correct draping given Marcus Fabius Quintilianus in this treaty on the education of the orator.[82] According to the preserved footwear, at one of the Gerasene togati (cat.-no. 8) represented a notable in senatorial rank, another one belonged to the social class of the knights or equites (cat.-no. 12).

Compared with the neighbouring provinces of northern Africa or Asia Minor the rare occurrence of the togatus-type in Syria, Palestine and Arabia is quite obvious: Only few togati are known the agora at Palmyra [83], Bosra [84] and single ones from Sidon [85], Kyrrhos / Nebi Huri [86], Gadara [87] and Petra.[88]

An enthroned togatus out of porphyry at Caesarea Maritima has been identified as a colossal effigy of Emperor Hadrian.[89] This important harbor town and the larter provincial capital of Roman Palestine, originally re-founded by Herod I in honor of Augustus, preserves another sculptural document for the occurence of the toga in the early years of the principate: Two marble fragments of colossal size (Fig. IV. 60)[90], today lying at the shore west of the theater, belong to a statue of an enthroned Roman official once reaching a hight of about 3 m. Mistakenly dated by Israeli Archaeologists to the 2nd century AD and identified as the statue of a Roman Emperor, the tiny umbo hanging over the balteus assigns the drapery with certainty to the earliest types of the imperial Roman togati starting in the last decade prior to the begin of the Christian era.[91] It seems thus very likely that this Caesarea colossus was part of the figural program of the sanctuary of Augustus and Dea Roma or the seer entry piers at the harbor dedicated by Herod in honor of the princeps and his family. The over life-sized format of this sculpture makes us think of a prominent personality in the domus Augusta, such as Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa (64/62 BC–12 BC) – the closest friend of the Emperor and of king Herod.[92]

The scarcity of the specific Roman statuary type of the togatus coincides with the relatively rare occurrence of official portraiture in the Orient. Other Roman provinces such as those of Asia Minor or north African produced in contrast hundreds of such toga statues. Why have relatively so many togati have been found at Gerasa? Why not in the provincial capital Bosra? This phenomenon may be explained by the fact that Gerasa was the seat of the Roman financial authorities for the military and civilian administration. High ranked Roman officials formed a substantial part of the Gerasene population in the 2nd century AD. Even Emperor Hadrian resided at Gerasa – not at Bostra! – in winter quarters during his renowned oriental journey in AD 129 / 130.

According to the available inventory information, all Gerasene togati have been found in the northern hall adjacent to the eastern baths. The architectural decoration implies a date during the second half of the 2nd with alterations during the first quarter of the 3rd century AD.[93] In contrast to this, the majority of the statues known today as finds from the northern hall predate its construction. The base of the dancing Muse, treated above (cat.-no. 6) is firmly dated by the inscription of its base to the early 2nd century AD. The Aphrodite (cat.-no. 4) has been dedicted originally to a sacral context and not to a bath in the reign of Antonine Pius. This evidence strongly implies the conclusion, that older statuary had been accumulated from elsewhere in the city of Gerasa, probably from other sanctuaries and monuments within the urban topography, to be reinstalled in a sort of a new gallery, which was functionally clearly separated from the baths. Since one of the inscription bases names the dedication of a bronze (?) statue of Caracalla, it may be assumed that this refurbishment of older sculpture stands in connexion with the veneration of this Emperor, probably on the occasion of the edict of the constitutio Antoniana of AD 212 [94] which granted Roman citizenship to all free inhabitants of the Empire. This would logically explain the re-use of older togati statues by the former provincial citizen who received a new legal status by this imperial degree. Since the torsi (cat.-no. 9; cat.-no. 10; cat.-no. 12) are all monolithic, the conclusion is inevitable that the old portraits had to be re-cut and changed for their new display – a quite common practice over all the empire in Roman portraiture.[95]

It is the undisputable merit of J. Seigne having carefully mapped the positions of the inscribed statuary bases at the moment of their discovery in 1986.[96]. Some of them had been found in situ, others had been moved after the destruction of the building. His documentation diverges in many points from the information given by E. A. Friedland [97], who relied basically on more or less accurate oral communications given by members of the local Department of Antiquities. It must be taken into consideration that only about 30% of the northern hall has been excavated yet by the salvage digs of the Jordanian authorities. The campaign of 2016 by The University of Jordan and The French Archaeological Mission to Jerash uncovered for the first time a major sector of the exedra and of the transitional vestibule (“room M”) between the North Hall and the caldarium of the baths.[98] Thus far the plinths of the hitherto known sculptural fragments are preserved, their shapes and sizes as well as technical devices such as dowel holes and clamps may help to attribute single figures to the preserved (and probably still in situ standing) inscriptional bases. A future precise documentation of the find spots of still covered sculptural fragments will supplement such a research by relating them to the expected epigraphic finds which will enlarge our knowledge of the programmatic sculptural decoration of public spaces of the “Kaisersaal”[99] in the eastern provinces of the Roman Empire.

A possible candidate for the togatus of senatorial rank is named on the cylindrical base of the statue of C. Allius Fuscianus, the legate Augusti pro pretore, designated consul. Marcus Antonius Gemellus, the cornicular of the imperial procurator of Arabia Vibius Celer donated it in Fuscianus’ honor.[100] This high ranked administrative officer belonged to the senatorial rank and thus was permitted to wear the calcei senatorici of cat.-no. 9 which is dated below by stylistic criteria to the mid or third quarter of the 2nd century AD. Two other inscriptions witness the presence of C. Allius Fuscianus at Gerasa at the end of the reign of Antoninus Pius to the early years of Marcus Aurelius – or more precisely, as S. Agusta Boularot proposed, between 159 and 162 AD. Where this statue stood before it was moved to the Severian northern hall, is not known. In later time the base received a secondary epigram which states that the base was re-used by demand of the provincial governor Domitius Antoninus to carry the statues of Diocletian as a counterpart of a statue of Maximian.[101]

· [Cat.-no. 13] Various fragments of a togatus

**Portrait head of a Severian matrona / Figs. IV. 60-63**

At a first glance, the female portrait head strongly re-sembles portraits of Julia Domna, the Syria born spouse of Septimius Severus. This is due to the coiffure, parted in the forehead and combed in wavy strands, covering the ears, down to the nape of the neck. Most of the scholars interpret this voluminous “helmet-coiffure as a wig.[102] In the present case, the traces of a yellowish-orange paint may indicate that the hair of the matron’s wig had a reddish-blond blend. On ascertained portraits of the empress [103] as well as on official coinage, a small curl of her grown hair falls on either side in front of the temples down upon the cheeks. This significant detail is missing at the Jerash head. Also, the empresses’ physiognomy is characterized by full fleshy cheeks with a rounded, small chin. Compared with it, the physiognomy of the Jerash portrait avails itself with a more meager, regular outline bordered below bya broader, almost masculine chin. The identification with Julia Domna appears rather unlikely, and also other female members can be deleted as possible candidates by a confrontation with ascertained portraits of Julia Mamea and Soemnias. At the present stage of research, one has to confine himself to assign this portrait to an anonymous high ranked noble lady, either the spouse of a high ranked Roman officer or a matron of the urban nobility of late Roman Jerash. The curved diadem does not give any hind to the rank or identification of that person since in that period it appears both in representations of divinized as well as noble mortal women of the Roman and provincial upper classes. To sum up: The regular and idealized facial features make any association with particular female members of the imperial family difficult. Therefore, the portrait-head could belong to a statue representing a lady from a notable local family, although female honorific statues were extremely rare according to the epigraphic sources.

The missing body of the portrait may be restituted as a draped female statues representing one of the common Roman standard types of the so called Pudicitia / Baebia, small or great Herculanean. All these types we wide spread in the entire Roman Empire and can be evidenced by countless examples also in the oriental provinces: Such standardized female statues are variously attested at urban sites such as Palmyra, Kyrrhos, Gabala / Djebleh, and Berytus. Some fragments of these standard female portrait statues are also known from Gerasa (Fig. IV. 65)[104], unfortunately without an indication of the exact find spot. A local version of such a female portrait statue carved out of limestone carried the (lost) inserted portrait of Hygeia, also called Philippa, of unknown provenance in the Damascus National Museum (Fig. IV. 66).[105] Its date of erection in spring of AD 202, attested by inscription, places this piece chronologically close to the newly found Jerash portrait in the time of the Severian dominion. This is, more or less, the same time when the present female head, mounted on its lost portrait statue, has been displayed upon a full draped statue in one of the niches of the rounded exedra back wall at the eastern baths of Gerasa.

Smaller Fragments of Marble Sculpture from the Eastern Great Baths

Beside the inscribed torso of Aphrodite and the Severian female portrait head, a number of smaller fragments of marble statuary have been found during the 2016 excavation. Few other items could be identified as finds coming from the salvage excavations directed by Aida Naghawi by traces of the former registry written upon the pieces (“NEB” = “north of eastern baths”).[106]

None of them, however, provides any clue of interpretation, and only the small drapery fragments cat.-no. 15 b., cat.-no. 15 c., cat.-no. 15 n., cat.-no. 15 m., cat.-no. 15 o. in the below catalogue may be attributed with certainty to one of the larger pieces. Nonetheless are they of importance because they may supplement future finds.

Fig. IV. 60 Two colossal marble fragments at Caesarea Maritima, today west of the theatre, representing an enthronedRoman official in the toga, late 1st century BC.

Fig. IV. 61 Portrait head of a Severian matrona Jerash, Department of Antiquities, no inv., excavation no. 20016/19 (cat.-no. 14).

Fig. IV. 62 Portrait head of a Severian matrona Jerash, Department of Antiquities, no inv., excavation no. 20016/19 (cat.-no. 14).

Fig. IV. 63 Portrait head of a Severian matrona Jerash, Department of Antiquities, no inv., excavation no. 20016/19 (cat.-no. 14).

Fig. IV. 64 Portrait head of a Severian matrona Jerash, Department of Antiquities, no inv., excavation no. 20016/19 (cat.-no. 14).

Fig. IV. 65 Lower part with plinth of a statue in the type of the small Herculanean, Jerash, Archaeological Museum.

Fig. IV. 66 Headless limestone statue of Hygeia, also called Philippa, unknown provenance, dated by inscription to AD 202. Damascus, National Museum (garden), inv.-no. 5692 / 13000.

· [Cat.-no. 14] Portrait head of a Severian matrona

Cat.-no. 15 a.

Fig. IV. 67 Fragment 2016//5 = NEB 7 (cat.-no. 15 a).

· [Cat.-no. 15 a] Reg.-No. 2016/5 = NEB 7

Cat.-no. 15 b.

Fig. IV. 68a Fragment 2016/8 (cat.-no. 15 b). [Bildquelle: ]

Fig. IV. 68b Fragment 2016/8 (cat.-no. 15 b). [Bildquelle: ]

· [Cat.-no. 15 b] Reg.-No. 2016/8

Cat.-no. 15 c.

Fig. IV. 69a-c Fragments 2016/9 a-c (cat.-no. 15 c).

· [Cat.-no. 15 c] Reg.-No. 2016/9 a–c

Cat.-no. 15 d.

Fig. IV. 70a Fragment (cat.-no. 15 d).

Fig. IV. 70b Fragment (cat.-no. 15 d).

Fig. IV. 70c Fragment (cat.-no. 15 d).

· [Cat.-no. 15 d] Reg.-No. 2016/10

Cat.-no. 15 e.

Fig. IV. 71 Fragment 2016 / 11 (Cat.-no. 15 e). [Bildquelle: ]

· [Cat.-no. 15 e] Reg.-No. 2016/11

Cat.-no. 15 f.

Fig. IV. 72a-d

· [Cat.-no. 15 f] Reg.-No. 2016/12 a–d

Cat.-no. 15 g.

Fig. IV. 73a Fragments 2016 /14 (Cat.-no. 15 g).

Fig. IV. 73b Fragments 2016 /14 (Cat.-no. 15 g).

· [Cat.-no. 15 g] Reg.-No. 2016/14

Cat.-no. 15 h.

Fig. IV. 74a Fragments 2016/15 a-b (Cat.-no. 15 h).

Fig. IV. 74b Fragments 2016/15 a-b (Cat.-no. 15 h).

· [Cat.-no. 15 h] Reg.-No. 2016/16 a-b

Cat.-no. 15 i.

Fig. IV. 75a Fragment 2016 / 17(Cat.-no. 15 i). [Bildquelle: ]

Fig. IV. 75b Fragment 2016 / 17(Cat.-no. 15 i).

· [Cat.-no. 15 i] Reg.-No. 2016/17

Cat.-no. 15 j.

Fig. IV. 76 Fragment 2016/ 20 (Cat.- no. 15 j).

· [Cat.-no. 15 j] Reg.-No. 2016/20

Cat.-no. 15 k.

Fig. IV. 77a Fragment 2016/ 21 (Cat.- no. 15 k).

Fig. IV. 77b Fragment 2016/ 21 (Cat.- no. 15 k).

· [Cat.-no. 15 k] Reg.-No. 2016/21

Cat.-no. 15 l.

Fig. IV. 78 Fragment 2016/ 22 (Cat.- no. 15 l).

· [Cat.-no. 15 l] Reg.-No. 2016/22

Cat.-no. 15 m.

Fig. IV. 79 Fragment 2016/ 23 (Cat.- no. 15 m).

· [Cat.-no. 15 m] Reg.-No. 2016/23

Cat.-no. 15 n.

Fig. IV. 80a Fragment 2016 / 55 (Cat.-no. 15 n).

Fig. IV. 80b Fragment 2016 / 55 (Cat.-no. 15 n).

Fig. IV. 80c Fragment 2016 / 55 (Cat.-no. 15 n).

· [Cat.-no. 15 n] Reg.-no. 2016/55

Cat.-no. 15 o.

Fig. IV. 81 Fragment not located (cat.-no. 15 o).

· [Cat.-no. 15 o] Not located

Cat.-no. 15 p.

Fig. IV. 82 Fragment not located (cat.-no. 15 p).

· [Cat.-no. 15 p] Not located

Cat.-no. 15 q.

· [Cat.-no. 15 q] Not located

Cat.-no. 15 r.

Fig. IV. 83 Fragment not located (cat.-no. 15 r).

· [Cat.-no. 15 r] Not located