Roman Art: Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius
The “Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius” was created as propaganda statue for the ruler Marcus Aurelius. Marcus Aurelius was a powerful leader and was best known for military conquests and his intellectual knowledge (Stokstad 200). Marcus Aurelius ruled in Rome from 161 to 180 CE. He was appointed as the ruler by the previous administration though he was not part of the royal family.
The “Equestrian Statue of Marcus Aurelius” was one of the lucky bronze pieces from Ancient Rome. It was lucky because the Ancient Romans often melted their bronze creations to make new ones. While this helped supply artists with material for new statues, the melting of statues has left modern cultures without knowledge of possibly hundreds of Ancient Rome’s finest pieces. Thankfully this statue survived is now at the Museo Capitolino in Rome, where it is an inside exhibit to keep safe from the harsh elements and pollution.
This massive statue is 11 feet 6 inches tall. Typically a human sitting on top of a horse would not r...
The difference between an archaic statue such as Kroisos (fig. 5-11) and a classical statue such as Doryphoros (fig. 5-42) may not seem very great in a single glance. In fact, you may not notice any differences in that one glance. Yet, if you were to look at them closely, you can see that these two statues actually have very little in common.
In Ancient Greek and Roman times, Romans often made replicas of Greek statues. The Greek were extremely good at art and the Romans wanted to possess the art themselves and thus, created copies of the most famous and beautiful Greek sculptures. However, it seems to be for the better since most Greek statues were created in bronze and were later repurposed for war. The Roman duplicates of these statues remained, due to their stone medium. What there is to ponder, however, is if there are any differences between a Greek and a Roman statue. “The Seated Boxer” is a famous work of Greek sculpture that remained preserved so that we might be able to view it
In this paper I am exploring “Portrait of Augustus as general” and “Khafre enthroned”. From exploring and getting to know the Statues in my Art History Book I have compared these statues (Kleiner, 2013). The first and most obvious similarity between the two is in the artists’ idealization and immortalization of their subjects. Both Khafre and Augustus are portrayed in an idealized manner, designed to give the impression of nobility, timelessness, and divinity. The two statues were the political advertisements of their times that showed the public images of reliable leaders who one
In the Ancient Middle East, the Roman time periods brought about many different works of art. The Votive Statue of Gudea, an Ancient Near Eastern work, and the Augustus of Primaporta, a Roman work, are good representations of art from their respective time periods. The two works have many similarities and differences within their formal elements, iconography, and historical significance to the time periods in which they were crafted. The Votive Statue of Gudea and the Augustus of Primaporta have similar formal elements through their subjects and differ through their styles and size. The Votive Statue of Gudea is a statue of Gudea, a ruler in the Ancient Near East.
Augustus is well known for developing a wide-spread Roman empire that included the provinces of Egypt, Cyprus, Spain, Gaul and Syria. The Egyptian influence resulted from the Battle of Actium in 31 B.C and negotiations with Mark Antony and Cleopatra VII. Egypt became a Roman province under the direct control of Augustus. He ruled as the pharaoh in Egypt and called himself, “the offspring of the gods.”
Charles Champoiseau uncovered pieces of masterfully worked Parian marble in April of 1863.1 On Samothraki, the island from which Poseidon is said to have watched the fall of Troy, these segments of stone came together to form four main sections: a torso, a headless bust, a section of drapery, and a wing.2 The sections were shaped to be assembled though the use of cantilevering and metal dowels, allowing the sculptor to extend beyond medium’s gravitational limitations (fig. 2). Just one year later, the pieces were assembled (and those missing were remodeled), and the Greek goddess Nike was revealed at the Louvre.
In my examination of the works, I came across a particular sculpture that portrayed both beauty and craftsmanship. A 15th century sculpture (1490), made in Venice, Italy by Tullio Lombardo, shows a life-size figure of Adam. Titled Adam, the work is the most prominent in the gallery mostly because of its 6-foot standing. It immediately caught my attention and gave me a very realistic impression. One beige color and made of marble, Adam is depicted simply, yet the statue has intense emotions. His meaningful glance is seen in the upward and tilted head position. Adam has almost lifeless looking eyes and seems to be staring into the distance. With these sagging eyes, parted lips, and lacking posture I feel Adam’s guilt is displayed in this figure.
The statue is made of marble, instead of the bronze statue. This statue is one of the earliest marble statues of a human figure carved in Attica. The statue is a kind of symbol; he does not in any way a likeness. This is my first expression when I saw the statue: the statue is showing me a simple, clear action that was used by Greek youth sculptures throughout this period. Looking at this statue, he expanded into 3D space, because he is standing straight and facing forward without any exaggerated movements, thus the post makes him look closed-off and a column his limbs are locked in space. Therefore, the standing posture, the decorations on his body, his hair and knee’s texture and how the Egyptians impact Greek art, is what makes me interested in it. A question that has always been in my mind is
This is a copy of the sculpture of Athena Parthenos, dressed in battle attire, that was originally created by Phidias during the period of 447-39 B.C. The statue of Athena Parthenos was to be constructed, not of bronze, but of gold and ivory. The face, arms, and feet of the statue were to be made of ivory and the clothing, of thickly plated gold. The statue was an enormous size that towered thirty-three feet tall. The costly nature of the materials out of which it was designed was intended to overwhelm the viewer, creating a sense of religious awe.
Discovered in 1889 during the demolition of an ancient tomb along a Roman road from Capranica to Vetralla, the marble garland sarcophagus depicts in “the best style of Roman art” (American Journal 220) a scene from the myth of Theseus and Ariadne. After acquisition by the Metropolitan Museum of Art a year later, a general background concerning the artifact was established. Originating sometime in the middle second century C.E during the Hadrianic or early Antonine period of the Roman Empire, the sarcophagus medium exists in Luni and Pentellic marble and stands 31 by 85 by 28 inches (McCann 27). The adornments upon the marble are many: the lid features winged erotes on chariots led by four different animals to represent the four seasons-bear for spring, bull for fall, lion for summer, and boar for winter (Hanfmann 180)-the front displays more erotes with “seasonal garlands composed of flowers, wheat, grapes, pomegranates, and laurel (McCann 33),” and the various scenes from the myth of Theseus above the swags but below the garlands from left to right show Ariadne giving Theseus the thread to navigate through the labyrinth, Theseus in battle with the minotaur of Crete, and Theseus gazing back at Ariadne as he leaves Naxos. In addition, a comic mask and a young satyr call the right side of the sarcophagus their home.
Kleiner, Fred S. A History of Roman Art. Boston, MA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning, 2010. Print.
In regards to subject matter, both pieces of sculpture are of leaders, Mycerinus and Kha-merer-nebty II were the pharaoh and queen of Egypt around 2500 BCE., and Caesar Augustus was the Emperor of Rome from September 23, 63 BCE to August 19, 14 CE., shown in this work as a general from Primaport, Italy.
He discusses that Roman statues appear greatly similar to those of Ancient Greece, both in material and in style. The statues both from Greece and Roman Republic were made from slabs of marble and bronze. In both cultures, portraits were used as expressions of honor to both the living and the dead. They were often used in funerary spaces and sanctuaries. Stewart supports the same principle that the other critics have stated, that portraits and statues were used primarily by the wealthy and elite members of the republic. They decorated the public spaces of the people, as a reminder of leadership within the community and as a way to honor the authority’s power. Imperial portraits were used as a symbol of devotion and established the presence of a powerful empire, bringing the devotion towards the emperor
"National Roman Museum - Palazzo Massimo Alle Terme." Soprintendenza Speciale per I Beni Archeologici Di Roma. N.p., n.d. Web. 05 Mar. 2014.
The Romans have adopted many features from the Greek style of art and architecture during the third and second centuries B.C. During that time period the Romans discovered that they have taking a liking to Greek statues, which they placed in many different places. The Roman sculptors then decided to also start making statues alongside the Greeks. The statues that the Romans created were realistic looking with, sometime, unpleasant details of the body. The Greeks made statues with, what they thought of, ideal appearances in the statues figure. Sculpture was possibly considered the highest form of art by the Romans, but figure painting was very high considered as well. Very little of Roman painting has survived the tests of time.