How
to
Read
a
Roman
Portrait


In this paper, I will describe the sculpture, Augustus of Primaporta, beginning with the Emperor’s head, one would note the definition of Augustus’ hair, individual locks that coalesce to form an idealized, dome-shaped style. His forehead displays two proportional, prominent bumps, likely muscles that control brow movement. His pencil-thin eyebrows are set quite low and impress a calm disposition.

Roman portraiture was one of the most significant periods in the development of portrait art. The characteristics of Roman portraitures are more modest, realistic, idealized, and natural. Also, the body compositions, muscles and facial expressions of portraits and sculptures are more advanced. Many roman portraits are directly linked to specific individuals, such as gods and emperors. They were often used for propaganda purposes and included ideological messages in the pose, accoutrements, or costume of the figure.

The Roman tradition of art, particularly architecture and sculpture is rooted in adopting styles of the past to convey a particular message. The combination of Greek and Etruscan styles, such as in the Temple of Portunus in Rome, ultimately culminate to reference a new meaning and style that is independently roman. Similarly to architecture, the first Roman Emperor, Augustus, chose to liken both is architecture, by using stone and the orders, and his portraiture back to the Greeks. Romans emperors ultimately tend to use style association to portray propaganda for their particular platform, as a form of associative mass media. Two emperors that exemplify this

Roman’s had an idealised view of what their politicians should be. From their ancestry to their attributes. In this essay I shall be looking at Gaius Marius. How did he live up to the Roman ideals? What are those ideals? I shall a number of these ideals one by one. But first I shall discuss what ideals the Romans have and why.

In many ways Roman sculpture went further than the Greek’s with magnificent displays of humanism and opulent Gods. Greek sculptures focused on extremely masculine portrays of man but with dimensions that were more or less reasonable in comparison to our human bodies. They were looking for perfection of a physical human body, and in the way the human body was sculpted. The Roman’s would put on great displays of grandeur, examples that can be seen through the busts and full-length sculptures such as Augustus of Prima

A well-known bust of this sort is the Head of a Roman patrician from Otricoli (ca. 75-50 BCE). While the Romans favored naturalism for the heads, a touch of the optimism that administered Classical Greek craftsmanship slipped into the representation of figures' bodies. For the Portrait of a Roman general from the Sanctuary of Hercules (ca. 75-50 BCE), an old man's head is propped on the admired more youthful body, finish with washboard abs. Proceeding with safeguarding one's romanticized picture is the Portrait of Augustus as a general (mid first century CE). In spite of the fact that idea to have been physically frail, in actuality, Augustus is delineated with executioner biceps and stunning Pecs in romanticized naturalism. His drapery reacts to gravity and his breastplate is detailed, finished with imagery and in addition a motivation. The reason for the figure is to exhibit the military force of Augustus (all things considered, he is shown as a general), show his ancestry, present a brilliant age in Rome and come back to the Greek Classical period in

Roman society was one of ever changing complexity. At a size of approximately one million people Rome was the pinnacle of an age long lost. Yet the society created by these ancient people remains in the ever changing culture of today. Whether it be the creation of a republic, the political entity still used by many today, to the mannerisms of war still taught by military schools the world over, Rome gave more to the development of civilization than almost any society. Even the phrase, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do” is commonly used around the world. In this essay Roman society will be analyzed from the rise to the fall of the great and vast republic and empire. Yet what was a Roman really? “The Romans thus created for themselves a “national self-image” or a “national character,” and they perceived of the ideal Roman as being stern, diligent, and self-sufficient.” Although this may be an image that many Romans accepted as their societies view of its subjects, there was much more to the Romans than that. As with any other society there were the rich and poor, as well as slaves. Looking back the Romans may seem to be a very militaristic society, but the every day life of a Roman was equally exciting. To discover the truth behind these ancient people’s lives one must however know the difference between fact and fiction, as many of the Romans writings were not entirely true, but instead full of myth. This essay will look at the politics, military, myth, and true everyday

Re-made and re-carved works have been around for hundreds of years as artists take inspiration from whom the original was recreated. In Roman art history, certain artists would re-make Roman portraits to honor those before them. However, this was not always the case as individuals would destroy and damage art as a damnation of memory. What determined our understanding of the specific work depended on why the remade or re-carved work was created. These re-made and re-carved artworks revealed a deeper meaning about the individual, culture and the society for whom the original was recreated.

In sum, we will argue that Ancient Roman Art emphasizes female likeness as solidly attached to female social identity “as the women whom they were meant to represent belonged to a certain kind of elite, of status, descent and wealth.” In other words, we would argue that Roman artistic representation of the female figure would constitute a social and political agencies directed at the male actors who commissioned them. As women’s status was directly related to the males, they were closely associated with, the identity of an upper class woman was highly tied to her social position as wife, daughter, thus sharing their distinction with their male kin. We will conduct our discussion in the comparison between the distinctions that are to be fond among this particular category: between the various fashions of the “Pudicitia” and the representation of imperial women, with the Statue of Agrippina (Fig. 4) Maior (Tiberian Period) and the Coin of Caligula (Fig. 5) (37-41

In the last decades of the Republic, the struggles between competing warlords with dynastic ambitions spurred related changes in visual culture. One of the new institutions of this changed world was the household of Gaius Octavianus, better known by his title of Augustus, and its supremacy. This resulted in the promulgation of the notion that it was both an exemplum to be admired and imitated, synonymous with the Roman state itself. In The Power of Images in the Age of Augustus, Paul Zanker examines the role of images in the cultural program of Augustus, arguing that a new visual language developed to express the ideals of the monarchy and to bolster the social changes desired by the new government. For instance, in 35 BCE, public statues of living women, honorific portraits of Augustus’ wife, Livia Drusilla, the first empress of Rome and his sister, Octavia, were initiated by Augustus and dedicated by a senatus consultum. Sadly, these portraits are only known from Cassius Dio and their original location of display in Rome is unknown. However, the very fact that the Senate had to authorise such portraits by a special decree, suggests the unique nature of such public honours to women.

One might reflect of the comparisons to be found between Gaius Marius and Cato the Elder. In this essay, we will be looking at the similarities and differences between two of Rome’s great men, who started from nothing and both becoming “Novus homo”. Both men came from similar back grounds, but their opinions differed considerably, but at the heart of each men, therein laid the same goal, to better Rome and build themselves up to the level of novus homo, in which both men accomplished this in their careers. The fame of these two men have been carried down throughout history so that we may know them today. We shall delve into the lives of Gaius Marius (hereinafter called “Gaius”) and Cato the Elder (hereinafter called “Cato”).

“The coin types may be considered political from the start, for the ubiquitous references to family and to ancestral achievements were a normal part of political discourse at Rome.” Coins were an integral part of society in Rome. In addition to coins economic function, emperors used coins as propaganda about their achievements and their family members. These coins would have been produced and used throughout the empire as an “abstract symbolism of power.” This was the case with funerary subject matter that was struck by heirs and other family members to showcase individuals being consecrated, and their own power as a result of this association. In this essay, I am going to examine the coins of Claudius, Faustina I, and Marcus Aurelius,

Greece was more idealized of beauty of the human form more so with the warrior body, and the use of new techniques to properly represent naturalistic features that will be constant. Greece had pride in their warriors and in their strength paying close attention to that in any way they could. Emphasizing in using naturalism better fit their view of beauty. In changing to a simple straight standing sculpture to an open form, in movement sculpture like the Disco thrower, the body form, curves the use of contrapposto the first sign of full movement. To Rome in their political strengths, and the verism of the portrait bust represent the truth, age, experience and lineage this was only to once again change in time. More interest in the mind and how they’d use that for their advantages in creation of architecture, weapons or portrait all show the brilliance of Rome. The use of symbolism plays crucial parts in all the cultures and works of art, they will share insight on what was being said at that time and what did the artist want you to see. All the works of art shows the time period was filled with humanistic changes that were direct effects of war, power changes like emperors, the styles, the plagues, deaths, coming of religions. The use of what was taking place was how the works of art even came to be if it was

In 27 BC Augustus began his political career with a “new policy which embodied a national and Roman spirit” (Galinksy, 1996, 225) and “represented new heights in creativity and sophistication” (Galinksy, 1996, 225). Augustus created a new political propaganda campaign that used art and architecture to promote and enhance his regime. The most fundamental message can be regarded as to establish the legitimacy of his rule and to portray him as the natural successor of Rome, as this is consistently presented throughout the visual programme. Yet factors such as the restoration of the Republic, reviving the old religion, nationalism and militaristic triumph can also be seen to be communicated prominently through art and architecture.

The artist’s ability to transform Miss Churm into “everything from a fine lady to a shepherdess,” and the Italian Oronte into an Englishman – compared with his inability to perform the same transformation with the Monarchs – serves as a