Unnumbered pageScan 4 of 54
-3-
One sees reflected in these words something of the older school of realism which preferred to depict men not as they were but as it would like to have them be. The great sculptor Lysippus, the one only among many whom Alexander permitted to represent him in bronze, is reported by Pliny as saying that other artists had represented men as they were; but he as they appeared to be; [handwritten: [pliny text in margin: volugue dicebat ab illis factos quales esse homines, a se quales viderentur esse. (N.H. XXXIV, 68.)]]
It is clear to which of these two schools Ptolemy's diecutter belonged. The subject of his portrait (Fig. 1) is an individual and not an ideal. It presents a likeness but it is the more impressive and memorable features of the man himself that are emphasized.
Did Ptolemy sit to his coin portrait or did the die-cutter have to rely upon second hand sources? We know that Alexander permitted Apelles to paint him, Pyrgoteles to engrave him, and Lysippos to represent him in bronze. Presumably, Alexander sat to his portrait with these three artists [handwritten: 4] (although he granted the privilege to them only. We know that Ptolemy was a man of wide interests and a patron of the arts. Besides being a great general and administrator, he … continues
65 figures hard to readstruck struck outadded written in above” jug ditto, and what it repeatsword reading not certain