More handpicked essays just for you.
Compare the classical and hellenistic sculptures, using at least one sculpture from each style
Gods and goddesses and their roles greek
Greek Gods and Goddesses
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The time of Doryphoros and Augustus of Prima Porta was a time of battle for everyone, but we mostly know of Ancient Greece and the Romans because of their story-filled ways of producing art. They had this amazing way of telling a story through sculptures and paintings. The Romans resembled most of their art on Greek predecessors; this is why the statue of Doryphoros and Augustus Prima Porta are so similar in detail and in their meanings.
Augustus of Prima Porta was crafted in 20 B.C.E and is known as one of the most famous sculptures by Augustus. Not only does this portrait resemble Augustus as a general of his army, it also shows his power and ideology as the first emperor of the Roman Empire. His hand raised in the air is a symbol of him
…show more content…
addressing his people and foretelling the future of the 200-year span of peace that is known as the “Pax Romana”. This statue was meant to show Augustus’ victory in not only being a great emperor, but also having perfect arête. He was a military victor, he had a youthful and perfect body, and he was also a great Greek athlete. There are many details to this portrait that some may not see. Like the message of the cupid riding a dolphin on Augustus’ right leg symbolizing his “naval victor over Mark Antony and Cleopatra at the Battle of Actium in 31 B.C.E” (khanacademy). This winning of this battle is what made Augustus the ruler of his Empire. The cupid is a representation that Augustus is from the Gods. The reason behind cupid being the symbol of this is because Augustus’ father was known to be a descendent of Venus who was the mother of Cupid, therefore the dolphin stands in for Venus, as she was a sea goddess, and showing the role she played in Augustus’ victory. Last, but not least, the breastplate found on the chest of Augustus. The reasoning for all of the art and symbols on his breastplate is to basically say that the Gods are on his side in battle. There is a more direct symbol in the middle of the breastplate however that strictly represents his victor of Augustus. Surrounding that piece are Gods and personifications; the sun God, Sol, and the sky God, Caelus, at the top. On the sides of the breastplate are females in a personification of countries he has conquered. This message translates to the sun shining over the Roman Empire to bring peace and prosperity to its citizens. Below the females are Apollo and Diana, two major figures in the Roman pantheon that favor Augustus and his traditional religion. And lastly, at the bottom is Tellus, known as the Earth goddess who is cradling two babies and is holding a cornucopia. Although Augustus of Prima Porta was not sculpted first, it seems to be more well known than Doryphoros.
Doryphoros was originally sculpted in 440 B.C.E in a bronze form, but was copied in marble in 120 B.C.E after the originally was lost. Some believe that Augustus did not intend to copy Doryphoros, but rather to use the sculpture as a starting point and to better his own work. “In the reading by Pollini entitled ‘Augustus of Prima Porta and the Transformation of the Polykleitan Ideal: The Rhetoric of Art,’ the author points out that the muscled form as seen on Augustus was rarely seen in earlier Roman art. This suggests that the creator of Augustus did not use the Doryphoros as a model” (watereddownamerica). Like the statue of Augustus, Doryphoros is very muscular and shows a lot of power and strength. They are both also very similar in stance. Although Doryphoros seems to be in mid stride, Augustus looks as if he is standing still and speaking boldly. An obvious difference between the two would be the clothing and lack of clothing. I believe this is showing two completely different meanings. The lack of clothing on Doryphoros is meant to show the perfection of the human body while Augustus was showing an ideal protector of his time.
Polykleitos wanted to capture the, what was known as ideal, figure of the human body when he began to sculpt Doryphoros. Polykleitos believed that the body was made up and divided into exact mathematical measurements that all related to each other, so he formulated a rule for this known as the “Canon” which also means rule or measure. This sculpture stands at about six feet tall to resemble the true height of a man with true
arête The body of Doryphoros, for example, stands in what is termed contrapposto, meaning that his weight rests on his right leg, freeing his left to bend. In the process, the right hip shifts up and the left down; the left shoulder raises and the right drops. His body is brought into a state of equilibrium through this counterbalancing act (learner). It is believed that Doryphoros was originally holding a spear, and although he is meant to represent a warrior of his time and be prepared for battle, he is not dressed in a suit of armor or any gear for that matter. This makes it rather difficult to tell what the meaning of this statue was meant to be when the spear is gone. The scene of a nude statue was a classical Greek trademark meant to separate Greeks from their very disliked and barbaric neighbors.
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
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.
The Statue of a kouros and the Portrait statue of a boy both depict similar subjects, however are greatly different in how they accomplish this task. Through detail, or lack there of, the Greeks and Romans are able to display a certain value they have in its members. These two statues were made about 500 years apart and approach the sculpting process quit differently. The Greek statue seems to use geometric exaggerated lines to form the body while the Romans use a more realistic approach and sculpt the body with a more rounded finish. Statue of a kouros, from about 590 B.C and Portrait of a boy, from about the first century, do not share any great technical aspects and are basically nothing alike.
Both figures are in a very traditional, standing pose for the time period in which they were created. The sculpture of Augustus is based on the Greek classical statue of the Spear Bearer or Doryphoros by Polykleitos. He is standing in contrapposto, a very classical standing pose wherein the weight of the body is shifted naturally so the figure’s weight is more on one leg, with the other leg slightly bent behind and the hips tilted. Mycerinus and Kha-merer-nebty II are both in the standard Egyptian canon standing pose, in which the figures are rigidly frontal with the pharaoh’s arms down at his sides and fists clenched. Like Augustus, one leg is slightly ahead and one is behind, but there is no contrapposto, the figure’s weight is shared equally by both legs and the hips are squared and level.
The Augustus of Primaporta depicts the emperor standing with his arm raised and with all his weight shifted into one foot. This is slightly different than the Votive Statue of Gudea, both positions are symbolic of the way a rule from each time period would have addressed troops. Augustus, along with his youthful features, is exactly how Augustus would have wanted to be remembered. This is also true of the Votive Statue of Gudea. There are many other symbolic details that relate to mythology and history incorporated into the statue of Augustus.
There is much symmetry between Cleopatra and Dido, both are Africans, both fall in love with a roman, and both lead their men astray. However Anthony remains with her queen, whereas Aeneas leaves
Polykleitos’s focus on proportion was mathematical in its exactness and thus created a manikin–like form in its sharp separations between appendages (obvious in the exaggerated indentation between the upper thighs, groin and waste region). This unnatural yet understandably idealistic (perfect abdominals, wide chest region, etc.) rectangular presence leaves Doryphorus appearing rigid and fixed in space. Some say Polykleitos designed his work with a “charm beyond [the] truth” by exceeding/flouting the limits of possible physical form. However, by placing a high degree of artificiality within his work, it lacks the narrative that comes forth when presenting an alternate to the ideal (Polykleitos). Donatello utterly embodies narrative sculpture through his less rigid, more youthful and effeminate rendering of
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.”
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
The sculpture is a Roman copy of the original Greek bronze made by artist Polykleitos in 450BC. It is recorded that he made the Doryphoros as an example of perfect proportion. He wrote a book to accompany the statue called, "The Cannon of Proportion, " and countless artists copied the statue because of its perfection. This regal figure was named Doryphoros (Greek for "spearbearer") because it originally held a long spear in its left hand.
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.
We find that, in conclusion, that these pieces are very similar in many ways. They are both originally created in the same style and time period. They are Hellenistic and dramatic, although in their own, individualistic way. Each sculpture was created in different mediums and have different stories. These are both very individualistic pieces of Greco/Roman sculpture that has influenced many artists throughout time and will
Here, we will be looking at a rendition of the high marble statue of Augustus Caesar known as “Augustus of Prima Porta.” Originating from 1st Century A.D., it is said that there is a possibility that the original sculpture could have been of greek descent. Upon a general overview of the sculpture, one can see that Augustus fulfils a millitarial role of some kind. From his very stance to the garments portrayed on him, Augustus is draped in a decorative cuirass and a tunic, accompanied by a figure of Cupid clutching on to his right calf. After taking the general themes of the work into account, one can then began to start unraveling the many symbolic elements embedded into the sculpture that allude to godly themes. Starting from the crown of his head, the very chiselment and structure of his face gives the work a youthful element to it, even though some say that Augustus was around 40 years old. A recurring theme within Greek and Roman culture is the matter of godliness and immortality amongst idolized figures themselves. This idea is usually depicted by displaying powerful human being in a younger light. This
Roman art was also deeply influenced by the art of the Hellenistic world, which had spread to southern Italy and Sicily through the Greek colonies there. The Etruscans and Babylonians can also be seen as inspirations. “With the founding of the Republic, the term Roman art was virtually synonymous with the art of the city of Rome, which still bore the stamp of its Etruscan art” (Honour and Fleming,1999). During the last two centuries, notably that of Greece, Roman art shook off its dependence on Etruscan art. In the last two centuries before Christ, a distinctive Roman manner of building, sculpting, and painting emerged. Indeed, because of the extraordinary geographical extent of the Roman Empire and the number of diverse populations encompassed within its boundaries, “the art and architecture of the Romans was always eclectic and is characterized by varying styles attributable to differing regional tastes and the...
Even the few sculptor’s names known to us, usually by chance, from the imperial period are Greek names and seem to confirm the assumption that these artists’ work should be regarded simply as a late phase of Greek art” (Hanfmann, 12). The Greeks were the first western culture to figure out how to accurately depict the human form which they did through the use of geometric ratios. It is also widely accepted that it was even Greek artists who first made marble portraits for the Romans as the Romans originally had no skill with the stone. “It was certainly at first Greek artists who were entrusted by eminent Romans with the execution of portraits of themselves and of important personalities in the Roman state, just as it was Greeks who depicted Aemilius Paulus victory at Pydna and later were largely responsible for the portraits of the emperors” (Kahler 16). The Romans mainly used terracotta for their sculptures and it was only when Augustus reigned that the marble quarries at Carrara were opened and marble was used on a large scale. The Romans inherited the use of realistic proportions, the sense of movement (contrapposto), and the overall beauty of Greek sculptures. A great example of Roman sculpture that was clearly carved by a Greek artist who was familiar with the Hellenistic styles of Greece, is the Relief of the Wedding of Amphitrite and Neptune. It “shows a mythological