Note on some fragments of Imperial statues and of a statuette of Victory

Abstract

The three fragments of Imperial statues which I propose to discuss are all of bronze, and they have this in common that all of them were found in Britain. The first, which has long been familiar to frequenters of the British Museum, has been published on various occasions. It has indeed been described and illustrated in an earlier issue of the Journal of Roman Studies. I refer to the fine head of Hadrian (plate I), found in the Thames near London Bridge in 1834. The story of its discovery, as told in a contemporary issue of the Gentleman's Magazine, contains nothing that would help to explain how or when it found its way into its strange resting-place. That it had originally been part of a colossal statue is hardly open to question. And it is almost equally certain that the statue must once have stood in some public place in Roman London. Mr. Roach Smith was disposed to think that it had formerly adorned the poop of a Roman ship. But his suggestion, though he appeals to Virgil to support it, appears to be exceedingly improbable. In bulk and shape it is ill adapted for such a position, and other noteworthy artistic objects of bronze, which cannot possibly have served a purpose of the kind, were dredged from the river at or near the same spot in 1837. We may be sure that all alike were thrown into the water as the readiest means of getting rid of what was regarded as worthless rubbish. We cannot tell whether it was ignorance or malevolence that was responsible. The most we can safely affirm is that a statue of Hadrian is not likely to have suffered violence at the hands of loyal subjects of Rome. Whatever his idiosyncrasies, this Emperor left no evil memory behind him. The head itself, if not very good as a portrait, has considerable artistic merits. From these points of view, I have nothing to add to what has been already so well said of it by others. Nevertheless it may be permissible to draw attention to it again, partly for the sake of completeness and partly because it supplies an excuse for recalling a very apposite passage, which I do not remember to have seen quoted in connexion with it before.