Introduction

The difficulty for those approaching Ptolemaic and Roman sculpture for the first time is that few statues are inscribed and, as a consequence, we are almost entirely dependent upon stylistic analysis to construct a relative sequence. For this, training in art-historical analysis is necessary, and the detailed analysis of eye-shape and the inclusion or absence of a philtrum (the area between the nose and upper lip, which is often absent on representations of Ptolemy II) is probably enough to deter even the most interested students. Add to this that, in order to understand how sculpture was used during the two periods, it is necessary to be able to analyse both Greek and Roman-style statuary and it is not difficult to see why this subject is often neglected.

Traditionalists seem to consider Egyptian sculpture of the Ptolemaic and Roman Periods to be degenerative and contaminated by outside influences. This observation contains a measure of truth but can be seen as a positive if one wishes to study cultural interaction. This interpretation is reflected in the manner in which the two periods are often amalgamated and described as GraecoRoman in spite of their being different in terms of administration. During the Ptolemaic Period there was a resident royal family, whereas few Roman emperors even visited the province. This had a substantial impact on manufacturing processes, particularly with regard to objects that were directly connected to the royal cults (Ashton 2003).

This chapter will attempt to summarize the key developments and influences over a five-hundred year period, from the Macedonian conquest of Egypt by Alexander in 332 BC to the late second century ad. It will include the key developments and trends in the production of sculpture in Egypt and in Italy during the Roman Period. I have broken the material into sections according to styles and will look at royal, private, and divine imagery under each sub-heading.