|
This is beautiful.
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 15:37 |
|
|
Please tell me there are more of these.
|
|
#
?
Oct 21, 2016 19:47
|
|
|
That was amazing and brightened my day.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 07:33
|
|
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-37786103 This news story says that the statue was excavated from the Ostian baths, which got me wondering. I understand how derelict buildings get buried, but how does an amazing statue like this end up underground? Romes been inhabited continuously since the baths fell into disuse, why was the statue never taken by anyone?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 12:05
|
|
|
Here's a similar example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laoco%C3%B6n_and_His_Sons It seems strange that, being considered such a high-quality piece back in the day, that it was left to rot inside the palace of Titus when it was abandonded.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 13:08
|
|
|
It seems to me that the value given to pieces of art is subjective and can vary a lot depending on the time and place. It's possible nobody cared about Roman statues before the Renaissance, and since it couldn't easily be turned into construction material (since a bunch of ruins got destroyed for this reason), nobody bothered to take it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 13:31
|
|
|
Kassad posted:It seems to me that the value given to pieces of art is subjective and can vary a lot depending on the time and place. It's possible nobody cared about Roman statues before the Renaissance, and since it couldn't easily be turned into construction material (since a bunch of ruins got destroyed for this reason), nobody bothered to take it. Personally I don't agree with this, because of how far the greco-roman style spread. E.g. the buddha statues in that style, and recently they were theorizing that the terracotta army was also greek influenced. What I draw from that is that this style of statuary has some kind of objective aethestic beauty that stretches across time and cultures. I can see how you might have more pressing concerns if you live in ghost town Rome though, still I find it unlikely that everyone was eking out a subsistence life considering that there was still a senate and pope of Rome after the city fell from grace.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
Except that Constantine the Great had a number of renowned pieces of art relocated to his new capital: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horses_of_Saint_Mark https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athena_Promachos You'd think something like that would happen to the best pieces from the old palaces, though perhaps changing tastes would have made it so that it was no longer considered a remarkable sculpture by the time it was abandoned.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 13:57
|
|
|
buckets of buckets posted:some kind of objective aethestic beauty that stretches across time and cultures. edit: the buddhist sculptures in the greek style are greek because the people who produced them were greco-indian
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:edit: the buddhist sculptures in the greek style are greek because the people who produced them were greco-indian Greco-Indian art was hugely influential though, all across Asia. The whole idea of representing Buddha as human instead of an abstraction was the Greek influence. There are temple guardian statues in Japan derived from Hercules and there weren't any Greeks over there. I have no comment about objective aesthetics but Asian human statuary owes a ton to the Greeks. The Hellenic and later stuff, anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
It wouldn't take long for vegetation to take over some half torn down palace, at which point the ruins might well end up as the border markings of some guy's vineyard, and if this guy and his descendants weren't buds with an abbot or senator who's well into art, what should they do with their huge, broken, soiled statue? Flog it at the market?
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Greco-Indian art was hugely influential though, all across Asia. The whole idea of representing Buddha as human instead of an abstraction was the Greek influence. There are temple guardian statues in Japan derived from Hercules and there weren't any Greeks over there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:i am aware of the huge impact of greco-indian art and that is not my point, my point is if we're gonna start making comments about "objective beauty" we're going to have to do a lot of philosophical heavy lifting to justify it Yeah okay, I thought you were making two different points. I don't think the idea is entirely absurd but it'd need a lot of support. I think it'd be hard to support anything more than veerry general ideas like an appreciation of symmetry.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Yeah okay, I thought you were making two different points.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
HEY GAL posted:i am aware of the huge impact of greco-indian art and that is not my point, my point is if we're gonna start making comments about "objective beauty" we're going to have to do a lot of philosophical heavy lifting to justify it this is fair, I was leaning towards what GF is saying below, Greek proportion, symmetry and realism seem to be very appealing and not just to classics nerds like myself Grand Fromage posted:Yeah okay, I thought you were making two different points.
|
|
#
?
Oct 27, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
Kopijeger posted:Except that Constantine the Great had a number of renowned pieces of art relocated to his new capital: It's not like one can just pocket a multi-ton statue and carry it home. These things are big and fragile and can't just be moved on a whim, not even today. There may have been plenty of Emperors and Kings who'd be happy to decorate their palaces with this piece, but either didn't know it was sitting unclaimed, had other spending priorities, or different tastes. Also you maybe surprised just how fast the natural forces of erosion and deposition can work. If the bath was in a low relief area near a stream or river prone to frequent flooding, The bath could have become inaccessible in just a couple decades, before anyone with the wherewithal had time to move it. Now imagine if it were a bronze statue. Don't know anyone who can pay a team with mules, oxen, engineers, etc to carefully move a big delicate rock potentially hundreds of kilometers? Well just lop it into pieces and haul em to the local metal trader.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
I don't know where else to ask this, but anyone know of good books on paleolithic human geneologies or early human migrations in general?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
On the back of Rome chat the last few pages, Netflix has a new show out next week (Nov 11) called Roman Empire: Reign of Blood. Although there is basically zero information out about the show other than it was filmed in New Zealand, narrated by Sean Bean and is a 6 hour miniseries. "This stylish mix of documentary and historical epic chronicles the reign of Commodus, the emperor whose rule marked the beginning of Rome's fall." So who knows, it probably won't live upto Rome, no doubt, but it might be good? So, anybody have a brief history lesson on Commodus? Something a bit more substantial than Gladiator portrayed perhaps.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
Short version: We actually don't have that many sources on Commodus, and the sources we do have are contemporaries who were biased against him. He was probably a little nuts, but maybe not as crazy as he's portrayed in the sources and in popular culture today. His reign was actually very peaceful, and he was popular with the people and the army, but hated by political elites. A lot of his reign was spent putting down coups and conspiracies, which he may have opened himself up to because he was a pretty simple dude and relied heavily on advisers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 14:38
|
|
|
Jamwad Hilder posted:Short version: We actually don't have that many sources on Commodus, and the sources we do have are contemporaries who were biased against him. He was probably a little nuts, but maybe not as crazy as he's portrayed in the sources and in popular culture today. His reign was actually very peaceful, and he was popular with the people and the army, but hated by political elites. A lot of his reign was spent putting down coups and conspiracies, which he may have opened himself up to because he was a pretty simple dude and relied heavily on advisers. This is sort of true, but the big takeaway from what we do know about him is that he wasn't especially personally active or competent in the administration of the empire. Like Claudius, he seems to have ruled through a succession of non-aristocratic favorites to whom our sources are more or less hostile. However Claudius at least made some effort to travel within the empire in order to keep up the appearance of being a strong active military leader as an emperor should be. Commodus didn't do this. He was made emperor on the Danube but after returning to Rome he stayed there and, so far as we know, didn't go on any campaigns for the remainder of his life. This allowed provincial military leaders to distinguish themselves on campaign, getting a reputation and loyal soldiers as well as riches, which set the stage for the free-for-all upon his death. As a result of his staying in Rome he was in constant contact with the political class, but his relationships with them seem to have been poorer than normal. He taxed them to a degree they felt was unjust while enjoying relatively strong support from the lower classes, and seems to have attempted to set up a cult of personality. Statuary frequently depicts him as Hercules and he is said to have participated in gladiatorial shows in this persona. There is some reason to believe he grew less sane towards the end of his life, but he almost certainly was not as bizarre in his behavior as, say, Caligula was reputed to be. The most obvious comparison in previous emperors is Nero. He had a good public image among the lower classes, which kept him in power for a time, and a poisonous relationship with the elite, which kept him in the history books as a villain, but what he didn't have was the ability or inclination to oversee the running of the empire or indeed his own household, and that's why he got murdered and why such a serious civil war broke out upon his death.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 15:21
|
|
|
You mentioned Nero, but how do you think Commodus compares to Domitian?
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
Elyv posted:You mentioned Nero, but how do you think Commodus compares to Domitian? Unfavorably. Domitian was nearly as old when he came to supreme power as Commodus was when he died and was a more mature and respectable figure. He also had a prolonged period of learning the ropes of empire under his father and brother, which Commodus, being a teenager at his accession, simply couldn't. Domitian actually served in the senate, which probably colored his later disdain for it, and unlike Commodus he was extremely active in public administration, provincial governance, and military campaigns. His behavior as emperor was in fact pretty similar to that of the Antonines, they were all industrious autocratic types who ruled from wherever they happened to be and spent only as much time in Rome as they needed to. That said, they were mostly better at it than Domitian was, as you can see from the fact that they didn't get stabbed to death. Domitian is a pretty pivotal figure because he was the first emperor to pretty much dismiss even the pretense of being primus inter pares and actually make it work, he considered himself dominus over his slaves and everyone was his slaves. Which was tactless way of framing the situation, to say the least. Domitian was by all accounts not a likable individual and while he doesn't seem to have had the loopy/megalomaniacal streak of guys like Caligula/Nero/Commodus, he sure didn't make many friends and had a strong totalitarian bent, complete with purges of the elite and cult of personality. He wasn't a great emperor but I don't get the vibe of utter incompetence from him that I get from Commodus.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2016 22:47
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:There are temple guardian statues in Japan derived from Hercules Uh are you absolutely sure of that? Can you elaborate?
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Uh are you absolutely sure of that? Can you elaborate?  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhist_art
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 06:19
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Uh are you absolutely sure of that? Can you elaborate? I'm not an art historian but: many Buddhist temples in Japan have protector statues called Nio. These are the Japanese versions of Vajrapani, a Buddhist protector deity. In the Greco-Buddhist art the Nio were based on, the depictions of Vajrapani were derived from the standard images of Herakles. Here's a side by side comparison from GIS. I read a much more finely detailed argument about specific parts of the imagery and whatnot in college but I have no idea what book it was in so I cannot properly cite my sources.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 06:21
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:I'm not an art historian but: many Buddhist temples in Japan have protector statues called Nio. These are the Japanese versions of Vajrapani, a Buddhist protector deity. In the Greco-Buddhist art the Nio were based on, the depictions of Vajrapani were derived from the standard images of Herakles. Here's a side by side comparison from GIS. Edit: Nevermind its answered in your first post. I can search my college data base for a citation if it helps.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 08:13
|
|
|
Anyone have any ancient popular histories to recommend? I would rather not reread ol' John Julius Norwich, no matter how much I enjoy his books.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 09:51
|
|
|
Baron Porkface posted:Uh are you absolutely sure of that? Can you elaborate? The current theory I'm familiar with is that Alexander brought Greek culture to Central Asia, from which itinerant artisans spread Greek sculpting techniques to the Far East. Emperor Qin's terracotta army, for example, represents a huge shift in Chinese art in a very short time period - such that it almost certainly didn't happen internally. Not so coincidentally, it happened about 100 years after Alexander.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
What is the most important archaeological find related to Ancient Rome that has happened in the past 50 years? Any interesting stories of lost ancient texts known to exist (because of references in other works) being recovered? Sorry if these have already been answered somewhere, but it's a loving enormous thread and I'm like 12 pages into it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2016 09:21
|
|
|
Rollersnake posted:What is the most important archaeological find related to Ancient Rome that has happened in the past 50 years? I've always heard the Vindolanda Tablets held up as a really big loving deal, and they were recovered in the early 70s. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vindolanda_tablets
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
Not really Roman, but the recovered stuff from Archimedes is fairly recent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 5, 2016 16:41
|
|
|
I just found out that we had Caligula's actual wooden ships, enormous, but they were destroyed in WWII. http://rarehistoricalphotos.com/caligula-nemi-ships-1932/
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
drunkill posted:On the back of Rome chat the last few pages, Netflix has a new show out next week (Nov 11) called Roman Empire: Reign of Blood. Although there is basically zero information out about the show other than it was filmed in New Zealand, narrated by Sean Bean and is a 6 hour miniseries. What kind of show kills off its narrator?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 08:22
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:I just found out that we had Caligula's actual wooden ships, enormous, but they were destroyed in WWII. There is a ton of super cool poo poo we had and probably had that got bombed to poo poo in WW2. One of the reasons we were able to decipher the Mayan Glyphs is cause some soldier dude rushed into a library that was being bombed and nabbed some papers which he later used to essentially translate it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 08:35
|
|
|
Doctor Malaver posted:I just found out that we had Caligula's actual wooden ships, enormous, but they were destroyed in WWII. quote:Some contend that Caligula built the barges to show the rulers of Syracuse, Sicily, and the Ptolemaic rulers in Egypt that Rome could match any luxurious pleasure barges that they built. Quality journalism here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
Kuiperdolin posted:Quality journalism here. Who are the "Some" who contend that Caligula built these ships to impress nonexistent Egyptian and Syracusan rulers?
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 16:58
|
|
|
Caligula was pretty self impressed
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
I was hoping it would be the seashell fleet
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:Who are the "Some" who contend that Caligula built these ships to impress nonexistent Egyptian and Syracusan rulers? Weasels, every single one.
|
|
#
?
Nov 6, 2016 19:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 15:37 |
|
|
Because the best way to impress the leaders of Egypt and Syracuse is to build two ships on a lake far away from Syracuse and Egypt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 7, 2016 03:16
|
|
