Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T15:23:51.988Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

VI. Later Roman Art

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2016

Get access

Extract

Figure 35 shows one of the most famous of Roman monuments, the Arch of Constantine in Rome. Ironically it is largely famous for being bad art. This arch was dedicated in AD 315 to celebrate the tenth anniversary of the Emperor Constantine’s elevation to power, and more specifically his victory in a civil war which gave him control of Italy in AD 312. The inscriptions in the upper, attic portion of the arch record that it was dedicated in traditional fashion by the senate and people of Rome for Constantine’s divinely inspired defeat of his rival, the ‘tyrant’ Maxentius. Perhaps there is an allusion here to his new patronage of the growing Christian religion. The arch is next to the Colosseum, not far from the older arches of Titus and Septimius Severus, and it resembles the latter in general design. So in many respects it fits in the Roman monumental tradition, yet it is a highly problematic structure.

Type
Research Article
Information
New Surveys in the Classics , Volume 34: Roman Art , 2004 , pp. 111 - 131
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Generally, see: Giuliano (1955) with good photographs; Claridge (1998), 272–6 for brief, up-to-date overview.

2 CIL 6.1139.

3 Angelicoussis (1984).

4 Leander Touati (1987); 91–5 on dating.

5 Overview in Conforto (2001). Objections: Pensabene and Panella (1999); note review article by F. Kleiner (2001).

6 For a lively and idiosyncratic general introduction to late antique art see Reece ( 1999).

7 On spolia see: Blanek (1969); Brenk (1987); Kinney (1997); Elsner (2000); Coates-Stephens (2001); Coates-Stephens (2003).

8 Riegl (1985), 51–7, 77–8, 91–5, 101–2 (originally published in 1901). cf. Elsner (2000).

9 Berenson (1954). Cf. Spivey (1995) for partial defence.

10 Peirce (1989).

11 Brendel (1979), 86–92; Pirson (1996); both with references.

12 Useful works include Delbrueck (1933); Stichel (1982).

13 L’Orange (1965); MacCormack (1981).

14 For accessible overview of old debates see Brendel (1979), 38–47.

15 Note e.g. Kitzinger (1979); Pollitt (1966), 189, 213–27; L’Orange (1965), 19–33. For a good critique of problematic spiritual interpretations of late Roman portraits see Smith (1999), 185–8. Smith seeks to understand the portraits in their social context, not as disembodied reflections of the individual’s spiritual awareness.

16 Bianchi Bandinelli (1970), 65, fig. 69; Kampen (1981b), 52–9, 75–7, 139, no. 3.

17 Bianchi Bandinelli (1961); cf. Rodenwaldt (1940), on whom Bianchi Bandinelli based his arguments.

18 There are particular doubts about the usefulness of ‘plebeian’ or ‘popular’ art as a concept, and the notion of a simple opposition between two contrasting stylistic traditions has long been challenged: Brendel (1979), esp. 101–37; Clarke (1998–9).

19 Elsner (1995).

20 On Roman cult-images see Stewart (2003), 184–222, with further specific references.

21 Beard, North, and Price (1998), vol. 1, 246–312, 383–8; vol. 2, 43–9, 288–348.

22 See Beard, North, and Price (1998), vol. 1, 277–301 (passim); vol. 2, 88–91, 305–19 (commentary on textual and visual evidence).

23 For detailed discussion of Mithraic ritual and imagery, including analogies with Christianity, see e.g. Beck (2000). White (1990), 47–59 on mithraea. For excellent pictures of mithraea in Rome see Delia Portella (2000), 15–55.

24 Cf. Beard, North, and Price (1998), vol. 2, 307–8.

25 Elsner (1995), 210–21.

26 A recent exception to this tendency is Elsner (1998).

27 For overview of early Christian art see: Grabar (1967); Kitzinger (1977); Beckwith (1979); Lowden (1997), 4–60; Cormack (2000), 12–15; Jensen (2000).

28 On house-churches, etc. note White (1990). A roughly contemporary synagogue at Dura- Europos also yielded an unparalleled (and previously unimagined) set of Jewish wall-paintings.

29 Murray (1977); Finney (1994), with 3–14 on history of debate.

30 Finney (1994), esp. 99–145. Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus 3.59–60.

31 Finney (1994), 146–50, 286–90.

32 In the New Testament: ‘I am the good shepherd’ Qohn 10:11).

33 Signitive: Kitzinger (1977), 20, citing W. Weidlé; also ‘ciphers’. Staccato: Mathews (1993), 13 and 194 n. 18 for parallel terminology. For a more elaborate fourth-century example of the programmatic combination of such ‘typological’ images note the sarcophagus of Junius Bassus: Malbon (1990).

34 For examples see esp. Murray (1981).

35 For discussion of early images of Christ and philosophical prototypes see Zanker (1995), 289–320.

36 Spivey (2001), esp. 44–8.

37 On development of church architecture see Krautheimer (1986); Reece (1999), 89–108 (an entertaining basic introduction).

38 On the increasing luxury involved see Janes (1998).

39 Mathews (1993), esp. 92–114.

40 For fourth-century classicism see Kiilerich (1993). For ivory Eisner (1998) offers useful illustrations and discussions, e.g. 190–2. For Roman silver plate in general: Strong (1966); Kent and Painter (1977); Reece (1999), 109–27 (introductory).

41 Painter (1977).

42 Mango and Bennett (1994); colour pictures in Sotheby’s catalogue: The Sevso Treasure, vol. 1 (1990). The Esquiline Treasure is one of the other great Roman silver assemblages from the period, combining Christian and pagan imagery, now in British Museum: Shelton (1981). Note also Eisner (1995), 251–70.

43 Scott (2000), esp. 106–12; de la Bédoyère (1999); esp. 77–98. Cf. Arce (1997) for broader and later perspective. For different aspects of the art see Eisner (1998), 95–103.

44 Henig (1995), 120–6; Eisner (1998), 136–8; Scott (2000), esp. 113–45.

45 Dunbabin (1978); (1999), 107–29 for comprehensive surveys. Also Ling (1998), 77–97.

46 Carandini, Ricci, and de Vos (1982); Wilson (1983); Dunbabin (1999), 130–43. No Greek or Roman building makes more extensive use of mosaic.

47 On the art of late Roman houses see also: Scott (1997); Ellis (1991).

48 Articulation of spaces: e.g. Scott (2000), 106–11.

49 Daszewski and Michaelides (1988), 63–71; Dunbabin (1999), 229–32.

50 Cf. Dunbabin (1999), 230–2.

51 Cf. Elsner (1998), 218–21, with various examples of ‘syncretism’ - i.e. blending of elements from pagan and Christian religion.