Imagines in Imperial Portraiture

Swift, Emerson H.

doi:10.2307/497847

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Zambanini et al 2008;2009. 12 This was achieved by using initially 2D images (Zambanini and Kampel 2011) For an early discussion, see especially Swift 1923 andStuart 1939.…”

Section: D Imaging In Archaeology and Rationale For Its Application I...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Imaging Hadrian in Britain between Coinage and Sculpture: A New Digital Approach to the Study of Roman Imperial Portraiture

Calomino,

Bologna,

Wilson

et al. 2023

Britannia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a new approach to an old problem, the provincial reception of the image of Roman emperors. Applying 3D computer modelling, we captured the portrait features of Hadrian as represented on coinage minted for the British province, produced a 3D model from a coin and compared it with the bronze head of Hadrian found in London. The aim was to test the possibility, previously posited by other scholars, that the London portrait might have been produced by an artisan who used coin portraits of the emperor as his main – if not only – model. More generally, the paper examines the dependencies of coinage and sculpture on shared models and applies new technology to Roman portrait studies.

show abstract

“…Zambanini et al 2008;2009. 12 This was achieved by using initially 2D images (Zambanini and Kampel 2011) For an early discussion, see especially Swift 1923 andStuart 1939.…”

Section: D Imaging In Archaeology and Rationale For Its Application I...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Imaging Hadrian in Britain between Coinage and Sculpture: A New Digital Approach to the Study of Roman Imperial Portraiture

Calomino,

Bologna,

Wilson

et al. 2023

Britannia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Swift 1923 andStuart 1939 remain the standard references for the circulation of portrait models. Often such close correspondence to specific features can be seen, even in portraits from the far reaches of the empire, that identifications 37.…”

Section: The Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Uncanonical Imperial Portraits in the Eastern Roman Provinces: The Case of the Kanellopoulos Emperor

Riccardi¹

2000

Hesperia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. The American School of Classical Studies at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens. ABSTRACTThe identity of the imperial portrait in the Kanellopoulos Museum in Athens has baffled modern viewers. The portrait lacks an inscription and the provenance is unknown, although it is probably from the Roman East. The portrait bears the imperial attribute of a corona civica yet its features do not closely resemble those of any emperor. Comparison with other provincial imperial portraits in sculpture and on coins reveals that deviation from Roman canonical types is common, a finding also supported in the ancient literature. Stylistic analysis places the portrait in the early 2nd century, so the Kanellopoulos Emperor is probably Trajan.In the collections of the small but impressive Kanellopoulos Museum, located on the northern slopes of the Acropolis in Athens, an imperial portrait is displayed (Figs. 1-4).1 The identity of the figure cannot be easily determined by conventional methods. The imperial status of the image is secure. The portrait, measuring 35 cm in height, is greater than life size, a common characteristic of Roman imperial portraits.2 In addition, the portrait is of very high quality, both in material and carving. It was sculpted from a good block of finely grained white marble.3 The eyes, now missing, were originally inlaid in a contrasting material that would certainly have added a richness to the sculpture and no doubt also provided it with a sense of liveliness, now entirely absent from the blank stare and impassive expression that currently greet the viewer. The only surviving attribute is a leafy crown embeflished with a central jeweled cameo, on which faint traces of a relief can be detected.The crown on the portrait guarantees the imperial status of the person represented. Exact interpretation of wreaths worn in Roman portraits is often difficult because so many types are known from literary sources, but this particular wreath is clearly intended to show a garland of multilobed leaves woven together (although the lack of detail in the execution does not allow for much textural variety). The crown represents oak leaves, which are multilobed, rather than laurel leaves, which have a single lobe and are the only other type of leaf regularly used in Roman crowns. Oak leaves were used in the corona civica, the headdress at one time awarded to 1. This article grew out of a paper originally presented at the Archaeological Institute of America Annual Meeting in Atlanta, Georgia, in 1994. I am indebted to many scholars for their contributions and advice, especially ...

show abstract

Imagines in Imperial Portraiture

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Imaging Hadrian in Britain between Coinage and Sculpture: A New Digital Approach to the Study of Roman Imperial Portraiture

Imaging Hadrian in Britain between Coinage and Sculpture: A New Digital Approach to the Study of Roman Imperial Portraiture

Uncanonical Imperial Portraits in the Eastern Roman Provinces: The Case of the Kanellopoulos Emperor

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About