This book discusses five examples of the most famous ancient large cameos: the Tazza Farnese, the Gemma Augustea, the Grand Camée de France, the Caligula and Roma fragment in Vienna and the Gemma Claudia, from a feminist perspective. F. suggests that the pieces were commissioned by female imperial family members to advance the careers of their husbands and sons and explains why the phenomenon started with Octavian and disappears by the reign of the Flavian dynasty with some revival in the early fourth century ce. Roman imperial cameos have been studied since the seventeenth century at least; and scholarship focused primarily on the technical and artistic aspects as well as the identity of the sitters. F.'s book focuses more on the interpretative dimension of their iconography. The main discussion (in Chapters 3–7) is preceded by an introduction to the genre of large imperial cameos. There is also a separate, sort of introductory, account on Cleopatra and the Aquileia Dish (Chapter 2), while Chapter 7 (Gemma Claudia) includes a summary. The last chapter (8) on the revival of the large imperial cameos in the fourth century ce works as an epilogue. The book is completed by a list of illustrations, a bibliography and a useful and detailed index.
F.'s study is difficult to assess because, on the one hand, the author presents a model for the analysis of selected cameos – a four-stage life cycle of iconography based on Göran Hermerén's methodology, which has never been applied to glyptics. The idea should be appreciated as much as her feminist approach to the interpretation of the cameos and F.'s discussions of the Gemma Augustea and the Grand Camée de France. She takes the task seriously, reviewing previous scholarship and evaluating existing theories. However, some problems emerge during the analysis of specific gems. F. sets standards determining inclusion of the pieces to her analysis model (Chapter 1), but lacks consistency and sometimes pushes too much to prove a predetermined model. Many aspects of F.'s discussions of individual cameos are valuable, advancing our understanding of these objects, but at the same time some ideas such as the ungrounded reconstruction of the Caligula and Roma cameo fragment (Chapter 6) or the controversial interpretation of the Tazza Farnese (Chapter 3) make some of her points questionable.
The five case studies are meant to exemplify the feminist theory of F., who suggests viewing them as one phenomenon rather than separate objects. It is disputable to treat them as a uniform group. The first problem is the Tazza Farnese. Even if one accepts F.'s view of dating it to c. 30–20 bce, which most scholars will find controversial, F. points out several major and important differences between the Tazza Farnese and other large cameos discussed in the book (p. 46). F. tries to find ways to tackle these, but in the end they cannot be justified by the experimental stage one of the life cycle of iconography (p. 62). There are many more differences in terms of composition, technique, form and style that make the Tazza Farnese unique and different from large Roman imperial cameos. The Tazza is an enigmatic object, we know too little about it, and therefore there might seem to be insufficient advancement in the research on it through centuries. The connection between the Tazza and the Aquileia Dish is far weaker than suggested by F. While F.'s reasoning to consider the Aquileia Dish a propaganda tool of Cleopatra and Mark Antony might convince some, there is no solid argument to regard the Tazza as propagandistic in favour of Livia and Octavian, let alone to claim that Livia must have known the Aquileia Dish and that the Tazza is her direct response. We have no proof of that, and why should one not assume that the Tazza has no ‘imperial’ propaganda meaning, but was rather made as a private commission of a wealthy person because, essentially, its subject is mythological and Egyptianising, something in fashion in the first century bce, and the function could be a manifestation of wealth and high social status without political meaning?
Even if one accepts that the Tazza and other imperial cameos were produced within imperial circles, why not suggest that it was made on Octavian/Augustus’ commission, of whom we know for sure (cf. Pliny the Elder) that he interacted with gem engravers, especially Dioscurides? Another issue, perhaps coincidental considering how few large imperial cameos survive, is the date: why would Livia wait almost four decades before issuing a new large cameo (p. 70, from the Tazza Farnese to Gemma Augustea), when she was politically active during this time? The main problem is that the book is sometimes based too much on assumptions, which leads to overstatements. F.'s intention is laudable, she highlights the importance of these cameos, but their propaganda effect is immeasurable. In my view, it is better to expect them to influence visitors of the imperial palace (provided they were displayed there) with their rarity, artistic virtuosity and propaganda–dynastic message.
Regarding the commissioner of other large imperial cameos discussed in the book, one can say that the Gemma Augustea or the Grand Camée de France were products of the imperial workshop, for example commissioned by the emperor or his wife. Having no solid clues, we must speculate or remain silent and focus on other aspects of these cameos. F.'s arguments in favour of Livia and Agrippina the Elder to be the commissioners are well thought-out, although she admits that ‘there is no smoking gun evidence for the direct role of Imperial women in creating these cameos’ (pp. 17–18, n. 47). The problem arises again with the Caligula and Roma fragment from Vienna – in this case F. tries too hard to make it fit her overall theory while turning the piece into a fragment of a much bigger and entirely hypothetical composition. It is an interesting scenario, but pure speculation. Another problem is the Gemma Claudia: too small, much simpler iconography etc. (pp. 144 and 153), but this time, according to F., it theoretically fits the fourth stage of the model and illustrates the decline in the production of large imperial cameos.
According to F.'s standards (Chapter 1), the cameo should be considered as commissioned by a female imperial family member to advance the careers of their husbands and sons: what about the cameo depicting Claudius and Agrippina as Triptolemus and Ceres from Paris, Claudius or Nero and Agrippina from Cologne and Claudius on the eagle from Paris and Nero on the eagle from Nancy (both close to the apotheosis of Titus relief discussed on p. 159), and, finally and most importantly, the Hadrian and Sabina cameo from Berlin, to list only a few examples that should be at least mentioned or discussed, perhaps in a separate chapter? The latter is of the size of the Gemma Augustea. However, it is a second-century ce example, which does not comply with the theory that the model ends with the dawn of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. It would be interesting to see F.'s interpretations of the cameos from Severan times clearly testifying to the strong position of Julia Domna at the imperial court.
There is no space in this short review to cover everything, but, on balance, F.'s book is relatively strong in the explanation of (potential) female power behind issuing some large imperial cameos, while it is less convincing in persuading readers that the objects fit the proposed model. At least three out of the five pieces are controversial on many levels. Large Roman imperial cameos are exceedingly rare, and each is a much-individualised work of art, enigmatic in many aspects. As F.'s survey of their provenance shows, we have no reliable archaeological data and context for their find spots and use. Literary sources do not illuminate us either. In order to analyse them as a phenomenon, their definition ought to be broader, and smaller examples, such as those listed above, should be taken into account. Despite the outlined problems, the book is a thought-provoking contribution, certainly worth reading. Asking new questions and considering alternative explanations to what seem well-researched objects should be welcomed, and I hope F. will continue her research on Roman cameos.
