Periodic Reporting for period 1 - SculpSi (A digital edition of Greek and Roman Sculptors’ signatures (323 BCE-138 CE))
Reporting period: 2023-10-01 to 2025-09-30
The "Sculpsi. A digital edition of Greek and Roman Sculptors’ signatures (323 BCE-138 CE)" project was hosted at the Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS) within the research unit UMR 7041- Archéologies et Sciences de l’Antiquité (ArScAn), and the LIMC team Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae. The LIMC team is led by Prof. Prioux (Director of Research at the CNRS) and comprises some of the world's foremost specialists in ancient iconography and history of ancient art. The research unit ArScAn is based in Nanterre, at the Maison des Sciences de l’Homme – Mondes. The project included one secondment at another laboratory under the institutional oversight of the CNRS: UMR 5189 — Histoire et Sources des Mondes Antiques (HiSoMA) in Lyon. During the project, I added the University of Paris Nanterre (a member of the UMR ArScAn) as an associated partner. SculpSi was dedicated to the study of signatures of Greek and Roman sculptors active between 323 BCE and 138 CE (the deaths of Alexander the Great and Hadrian) in the areas corresponding to Roman Italy and the provinces of Achaia and Asia. The selected geographical areas include key centers for both the production and display of sculpture.
Sculptors’ signatures range from simple formulas—including only the artist’s name and the verb “to make”—to more elaborate ones that add meaningful elements such as an ethnic. Signatures could appear directly on the sculpture or on its base. Features such as cuttings (marking the position of the feet) can provide clues about the statue’s appearance and help identify its typology, allowing us to reconstruct the kinds of works produced by each artist.
Beyond mere digitization, the project had two main objectives:
1. to reconstruct the biographies of sculptors attested by signatures between 323 BCE and 138 CE in the area corresponding to Roman Italy and the provinces of Achaia and Asia;
2. To better understand the role and identity of the artist in antiquity, as well as their social status, their relationship towards their works, the reason for carving a signature and to shed light on controversial categories of evidence.
The results refined individual sculptors’ profiles and improved understanding of controversial documents and patterns in the use and formulation of signatures across periods and regions.
Sculptors’ signatures range from simple formulas—including only the artist’s name and the verb “to make”—to more elaborate ones that add meaningful elements such as an ethnic. Signatures could appear directly on the sculpture or on its base. Features such as cuttings (marking the position of the feet) can provide clues about the statue’s appearance and help identify its typology, allowing us to reconstruct the kinds of works produced by each artist.
Beyond mere digitization, the project had two main objectives:
1. to reconstruct the biographies of sculptors attested by signatures between 323 BCE and 138 CE in the area corresponding to Roman Italy and the provinces of Achaia and Asia;
2. To better understand the role and identity of the artist in antiquity, as well as their social status, their relationship towards their works, the reason for carving a signature and to shed light on controversial categories of evidence.
The results refined individual sculptors’ profiles and improved understanding of controversial documents and patterns in the use and formulation of signatures across periods and regions.
The research project was based on the study of around 550 signatures of sculptors active between the death of Alexander the Great and that of Hadrian. This study was done partly on photos and extant bibliography and partly travelling to museums and collections where these signatures or their squeezes are preserved. During the project, I studied all of them, but up to now I have encoded 310 inscriptions.
A major part of my fellowship was dedicated to training (WP1), through four Research Training Activities:
1. Digital Humanities (photogrammetry, QGIS, Affinity) for data acquisition and analysis;
2. Art History and Criticism, completed under the guidance of the LIMC team, specialists in iconography and literary sources;
3. Epigraphy, completed in Lyon with EpiDoc training;
4. Languages and career development. I followed French courses at IFSEM, allowing me to speak fluently with colleagues at ArScAn and even teach and publish in French. I also received soft-skills training, including a time-management workshop.
WP 2 concerned actual research, based on the collection of published data, which was carried out, as mentioned before, in Museums as well as in Parisian Libraries, and their analysis and contextualisation, in order to answer the research questions. WP 3 was devoted to dissemination and exploitation. An important part is certainly the construction of the open access database, in order to make the sources freely accessible. I also participated in two major epigraphy conferences: the SAEG IX (Seminario Avanzato di Epigrafia Greca) in January 2025 and the Epigraphy.info IX workshop in April 2025. I was invited to give a talk as part of the Archäologische Kolloquien at FAU Erlangen-Nürnberg and to deliver lectures on my research during Classical Archaeology courses at the University of Nanterre. In September 2025 I organized a two-day international conference in Nanterre, on sculpture and inscriptions in the Hellenistic and Imperial periods. Several articles linked to the project, as well as the proceedings of the conference, will be published. WP4 was devoted to communication and public engagement. I communicated about my projet through social media, and I took part to several general open days events and outreach activities, namely the 2024 and 2025 editions of Journées Européennes de l’Archéologies, respectively in Lyon and in Paris, as well as the 2023 and 2024 edition of the Fête de la Science, at the Maison des Sciences de l’Homme-Mondes. I participated as a Marie Curie Ambassador to the ArScAn Masterclass for applicants to a MSCA PF in May 2024 and May 2025, coaching the applicants and sharing my own experience. The project management (WP 5) was continuous as planned in the application. Thus the five WPs that I had planned have been completed.
A major part of my fellowship was dedicated to training (WP1), through four Research Training Activities:
1. Digital Humanities (photogrammetry, QGIS, Affinity) for data acquisition and analysis;
2. Art History and Criticism, completed under the guidance of the LIMC team, specialists in iconography and literary sources;
3. Epigraphy, completed in Lyon with EpiDoc training;
4. Languages and career development. I followed French courses at IFSEM, allowing me to speak fluently with colleagues at ArScAn and even teach and publish in French. I also received soft-skills training, including a time-management workshop.
WP 2 concerned actual research, based on the collection of published data, which was carried out, as mentioned before, in Museums as well as in Parisian Libraries, and their analysis and contextualisation, in order to answer the research questions. WP 3 was devoted to dissemination and exploitation. An important part is certainly the construction of the open access database, in order to make the sources freely accessible. I also participated in two major epigraphy conferences: the SAEG IX (Seminario Avanzato di Epigrafia Greca) in January 2025 and the Epigraphy.info IX workshop in April 2025. I was invited to give a talk as part of the Archäologische Kolloquien at FAU Erlangen-Nürnberg and to deliver lectures on my research during Classical Archaeology courses at the University of Nanterre. In September 2025 I organized a two-day international conference in Nanterre, on sculpture and inscriptions in the Hellenistic and Imperial periods. Several articles linked to the project, as well as the proceedings of the conference, will be published. WP4 was devoted to communication and public engagement. I communicated about my projet through social media, and I took part to several general open days events and outreach activities, namely the 2024 and 2025 editions of Journées Européennes de l’Archéologies, respectively in Lyon and in Paris, as well as the 2023 and 2024 edition of the Fête de la Science, at the Maison des Sciences de l’Homme-Mondes. I participated as a Marie Curie Ambassador to the ArScAn Masterclass for applicants to a MSCA PF in May 2024 and May 2025, coaching the applicants and sharing my own experience. The project management (WP 5) was continuous as planned in the application. Thus the five WPs that I had planned have been completed.
As for the conclusions reached by the action, the digitisation of the corpus is a major achievement in itself, as sculptors’ signatures are only rarely included in existing open-access epigraphic databases. Moreover, the only other database of signatures—the Marcadé-Donnay database on the Beazley Archive website—is now outdated and difficult to use. The SculpSi database will therefore provide a stable foundation for future research, benefitting scholars working on ancient sculpture, epigraphy, and artisanal practices, as well as serving as a useful tool for students.
The application of Digital Humanities methods, particularly through EpiDoc encoding, has greatly facilitated comparison among the inscriptions and has even led, in some cases, to small corrections in the restoration of texts. Beyond refining many aspects of individual sculptors’ profiles (Objective 1), I was also able to gain a clearer understanding of controversial categories of documents (Objective 2), such as the so-called retrospective signatures, which I presented during my conference in Nanterre. Additionally, I identified clearer patterns in the frequency of signature use across different periods and geographical areas, as well as variations in their texts. So far, the project substantially enhanced our understanding of the social dimensions of craftsmanship between the Hellenistic and Imperial periods, underscoring the importance of continuing this line of investigation.
The application of Digital Humanities methods, particularly through EpiDoc encoding, has greatly facilitated comparison among the inscriptions and has even led, in some cases, to small corrections in the restoration of texts. Beyond refining many aspects of individual sculptors’ profiles (Objective 1), I was also able to gain a clearer understanding of controversial categories of documents (Objective 2), such as the so-called retrospective signatures, which I presented during my conference in Nanterre. Additionally, I identified clearer patterns in the frequency of signature use across different periods and geographical areas, as well as variations in their texts. So far, the project substantially enhanced our understanding of the social dimensions of craftsmanship between the Hellenistic and Imperial periods, underscoring the importance of continuing this line of investigation.