Satala Aphrodite
The Satala Aphrodite is a larger-than-life–sized head of an ancient Hellenistic statue discovered in Satala (historical Armenia Minor, in the present-day village of , Gümüşhane Province, Turkey). It was acquired by the British Museum in 1873, a year after its discovery, and is on display in the museum's Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities. Whether it represents the Greek goddess Aphrodite or her Armenian equivalent Anahit is the subject of debate. It is usually dated around the 2nd–1st centuries BC. The head is widely depicted in Armenian culture as an iconic symbol of the  country's pre-Christian history. Discovery. In 1872, a man digging his field near the village of Sadak, in what was once the ancient Roman fortress of Satala, on the Kelkit River, north of Erzincan, uncovered several bronze statue fragments including a head and a hand. The head was acquired in Constantinople by Savas Kougioumtsoglou, a Greek antiquities dealer, who passed it to another dealer, Photiades, who took it to Rome, where it was sold to the art dealer Alessandro Castellani, who in turn sold it to the British Museum in 1873. The hand was donated to the museum three  years later. The rest of the statue was never found. Description. The head weighs and is between and high. The head and the hand belonged to a statue, from which they were removed. The back of the head is severely damaged, though the face has largely been preserved. The top of the head was damaged during excavation. The eyes originally had either inlaid gemstones or glass. The hand, which was found together with the head, holds a fragment of drapery. The head was first described by the German archaeologist Richard Engelmann in 1878. Origin. The precise date and location of  creation of the statue is debated. According to the British Museum it is from the 1st century BC. James R. Russell suggests that it was probably cast in western Asia Minor in the 2nd–1st centuries BC. Vrej Nersessian writes that it was probably created in Asia Minor in the mid-4th century BC. Terence Mitford argued, based on its style, that it is a work of the "late Hellenistic or early Roman period". He cites Reynold Higgins, who suggested that "it may be a cast from a mould made in c. 150 B.C., whether a Greek or Hellenistic original, or a  Roman copy." Brunilde Sismondo Ridgway writes that it is dated no earlier than the Augustan period. Babken Arakelian argued, based on a stylistic analysis, that the head is similar to statues created in Asia Minor in the 2nd century BC. Aphrodite or Anahit. Vrej Nersessian writes that it has been "usually interpreted as representing Aphrodite." However, it has also been identified as Anahit, the Armenian equivalent of Aphrodite, mainly because a temple dedicated to her at Erez (present-day Erzincan) was located nearby. Satala, like Erez, was located in the Acilisene (Եկեղեաց, Ekełeats‘) province of Armenia Minor. The first scholar  to suggest that the head comes from a statue of Anahit was Ghevont Alishan in 1890. The British Museum's website describes the work as a "bronze head from a cult statue of Anahita in the guise of Aphrodite or Artemis." The Armenian scholar Mardiros Ananikian wrote in "The Mythology of All Races" (1925) that it is a "Greek work (probably Aphrodite), found at Satala, worshiped by the Armenians." James R. Russell described it as "of the Greek Aphrodite type [...] believed to be from a statue of Anahit but more probably from a Roman temple". Zhores Khachatryan, a leading Armenian  archaeologist of the Hellenistic period, stated that "the Armenian origin of the statue still has to be proven". He believes that "it is more possible that it may be the statue of a Roman pagan goddess" as it was found near the site of a Roman camp inhabited during the time period of its assumed creation. Khachatryan had no doubt that it is a replica of Aphrodite of Knidos. Dyfri Williams wrote that it comes from a Greek cult statue, "probably made in a Greek city in Turkey" and found at Satala (in Armenia Minor). Terence Mitford suggests that it  is "normally assigned to Aphrodite" and an identification as Anaitis (Anahita) is "wholly implausible". Babken Arakelyan found Artemis to be a more probable subject of the statue than Aphrodite. Reception. In the west. As early as 1894 the American art historian Arthur Frothingham described the bronze head as "one of the glories of the British Museum". James R. Russell described it as a "piece of very fine workmanship." The head appears on the cover of "The Oxford History of Greece and the Hellenistic World" (2002). Peter Balakian authored a poem titled "Head of Anahit/British Museum", which was published in  Poetry magazine in 2016. In Armenia. Babken Arakelyan considered it the most prominent of all Hellenistic statues found in Armenia. A replica of the head has been on display at the History Museum of Armenia in Yerevan since 1968. "Still Life with Anahit's Mask", a painting by Lavinia Bazhbeuk-Melikyan inspired by the head of Anahit, hangs at the President's Residence in Yerevan. It also appeared on the 5,000 Armenian dram banknotes, which were in circulation from 1995 to 2005. The obverse side of the banknote depicted the Temple of Garni. The head is depicted on the logo  of the Artists' Union of Armenia (), and on two postage stamp issued by Armenia in 1992 and 2007 (the latter jointly with Greece). Efforts to move to Armenia. In February 2012 Armen Ashotyan, then Minister of Education and Science of Armenia from the ruling Republican Party (RPA), called for moving the fragments of the statue to Armenia. Ashotyan claimed that this was a personal and not a political initiative. By the end of February some 20,000 signatures were collected by the RPA-affiliated Armenia Youth Fund demanding that the fragments be moved to Armenia. Some one hundred people demonstrated in  front of the British embassy in Yerevan on March 7, 2012, chanting "Anahit, come home!" A letter was handed over to the embassy thanking the United Kingdom for preserving the fragments, but claimed that "historical justice requires" that they "be repatriated and find refuge in the country of their origin". One proponent of the campaign argued that the "sentimental value of the goddess Anahit's statue is worth far more to the Armenians than to the tourists and visitors of the British Museum". Response. The campaign received no formal response from the UK, but received criticism within Armenia. Zhores Khachatryan , a leading Armenian archaeologist of the Hellenistic period, criticized the campaign as "pointless" and "populism that failed from the start." Vahan Gasparyan, head of the Ministry of Culture's Agency for the Preservation of Historical-Cultural Heritage, noted that the fragments were "not illegally exported from [Armenia], nor was it a war trophy, so that the ministry could try to return it with references to international treaties. It's possible only as an act of good will."