Realistic Portraiture in the Republican Period

Aristocratic Romans of the later Republic were

historically self-conscious and very aware of their
genealogies—real or imagined! From at least the
mid-Republic (second century b.c.), they kept imagines,
wax portrait masks of their illustrious ancestors,
in household shrines. These masks were carried or
worn during funerals.
By the first century b.c., wealthy Romans were
employing sculptors from Greece and elsewhere to
create ancestor portraits made out of more durable
materials, such as marble. At least some of these
patrons also began to commission marble portraits
of themselves for the adornment of their eventual
tombs. Moreover, in the course of the first century
b.c., the practice of erecting portraits filtered down
from the wealthier Roman orders into the lower
economic and social orders, including those of
freedmen, who were former slaves. At the same time,
dedicatory statues were erected to honor triumphant
generals (and sometimes businessmen) in Roman
public places. These statues tended to be full-length,
and often paired the realistic face of the subject with an idealized body type borrowed
from a Greek
sculptural prototype.
The Romans believed that a person’s individuality
inhered wholly in his facial features; it was physiognomy
that revealed character. Therefore they often
commissioned portraits that consisted only of the
head and the bust. This marked a dramatic departure
from Greek practice, where depiction of the body was
considered to be an essential element in an accurate
portrayal of the individual.
By the first century b.c., there were two basic
portrait styles in use around the Mediterranean. One
was a youthful, dashing, and idealized type of image,
favored by Hellenistic kings. The other was a more
sober, realistic style. Aristocratic Romans favored the
second style, because they perceived that it re􀀰ected
Republican values such as virtus, which implied duty
to the state, military bravery, public responsibility,
and sober morality. These were qualities which many,
such as the writer Cato the Elder, feared were under
assault from the alleged decadence and frivolity
of the Greek world. Thus, the typical aristocratic
Roman portrait type of the late Republic emphasized
such characteristics as wrinkles, thinning hair, and a
grim expression, features meant to convey maturity,
wisdom, experience, responsibility, and the determination
to uphold strict Republican moral values. In
other words, Roman artistic verism was employed to
express socially approved values.

Multi-story apartment blocks called insulae catered to a range of residential needs. The
cheapest rooms were at the top owing to the inability to escape in the event of a fire and
the lack of piped water. Windows were mostly small, facing the street, with iron security
bars. Insulae were often dangerous, unhealthy, and prone to fires because of
overcrowding and haphazard cooking arrangements.[citation needed] There are
examples in the Roman port town of Ostia, that date back to the reign of Trajan, but
they seem to have been found only in Rome and a few other places. Elsewhere writers
report them as something remarkable, but Livy and Vituvius refer to them in Rome.[44]
External walls were in "Opus Reticulatum" and interiors in "Opus Incertum", which would
then be plastered and sometimes painted.

To lighten up the small dark rooms, tenants able to afford a degree of painted colourful
murals on the walls. Examples have been found of jungle scenes with wild animals and
exotic plants. Imitation windows (trompe l'oeil) were sometimes painted to make the
rooms seem less confined.

Ancient Rome had elaborate and luxurious houses owned by the elite. The average
house, or in cities apartment, of a commoner or plebe did not contain many luxuries.
The domus, or single-family residence, was only for the well-off in Rome, with most
having a layout of the closed unit, consisting of one or two rooms. Between 312 and 315
A.D. Rome had 1781 domus and 44,850 of insulae.[45]

Insulae have been the subject of great debate for historians of Roman culture, defining
the various meanings of the word.[46] Insula was a word used to describe apartment
buildings, or the apartments themselves,[47] meaning apartment, or inhabitable room,
demonstrating just how small apartments for Plebes were. Urban divisions were
originally street blocks, and later began to divide into smaller divisions, the word insula
referring to both blocks and smaller divisions. The insula contained cenacula, tabernae,
storage rooms under the stairs, and lower floor shops. Another type of housing unit for
Plebes was a cenaculum, an apartment, divided into three individual rooms: cubiculum,
exedra, and medianum. Common Roman apartments were mainly masses of smaller
and larger structures, many with narrow balconies that present mysteries as to their
use, having no doors to access them, and they lacked the excessive decoration and
display of wealth that aristocrats’ houses contained. Luxury in houses was not common,
as the life of the average person did not consist of being in their houses, as they instead
would go to public baths, and engage in other communal activities.

Although we may view the portrait busts of the

ancient Romans as works of art, the Romans usually
commissioned them as objects of commemoration.
Portraits of private individuals were displayed in the home
or in a funerary context. Public figures, such as emperors,
generals, and statesmen, were memorialized through the
erection of portraits in public places.

https://www.scribd.com/document/137411007/Portraits-Power-And-Patronage-in-the-
Late-Roman-Republic

https://www.scribd.com/document/120695783/Roman-Art-New-York

https://www.scribd.com/document/206772195/The-Cambridge-Companion-to-Ancient-
Rome

https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/ropo/hd_ropo.htm

http://d2aohiyo3d3idm.cloudfront.net/publications/virtuallibrary/0866590048.pdf ne ovo
GREEK.
A. Plans. Designs have refinement
and beauty, proportion
being of the first importance,
and there is a dignity and
grandeur of effect irrespective of
the smallness of scale.
Unity was attained in the selfcontained
temples, while variety
ofgrouping and some picturesqueness
was attempted in the Propylaea
and Erechtheion (Nos. 18,
26, 30).
Purity and severity of outline
caused by the simple method of
post and beam, did not lend
itself to such variety and boldness
of planning as resulted
from the arcuated Roman style.
No mixture of constructive principles
occurs in the buildings of
the Greeks, the limits of whose
style have not been yet successfully
expanded. The use of the true arch is avoided.
An example of a vaulted building
is the Treasury of Atreus, at Mycenae,
where the beds of the stones
are horizontal throughout, each
bed overlapping the one below till
the crown is reached (page 54).
The Greek Temples were usually
orientated, i.e., faced the east.
B. Walls. Constructed of large
blocks of marble, without mortar,
allowing of refinement of treatment,
and perfection of finish in
construction. Where coarse stone
was used it was frequently
covered with stucco. Jointing
was not reckoned as a means of
effect. Stability was achieved
solely by the judicious observance
of the laws of gravity, the adherence
of the blocks not being
necessary, for the weights only
acted vertically, and needed but
ROMAN.
A. Plans. Designs convey an
impression of vastness and
magnificence, and are characteristic
of a powerful and energetic
race. The Romans were
pre-eminently great constructors,
and knew how to use the
materials at hand. This constructive
skill was acquired by
the building, on a large scale,
of utilitarian works, such as the
aqueducts and bridges.
The arch, vault, and dome were the
keynotes to the whole system of
the style, and constituted a step
toward Gothic architecture. By
the use of the arch, wide openings
were rendered possible, and
by vaults and domes large areas
and complicated plans could be
roofed (Nos. 58 and 59), giving
boldness and variety and leading
to the system of intersecting
vaults, by which the concentration
of weights on piers was
effected. The use of recesses
rectangular and semicircular on
plan is a special Roman feature
(Nos. 50 B, 54 B).
The Roman Temples were placed
without regard to orientation.
B. Walls. Constructed of small,
mean, and coarse materials, such
as brick, rubble, and concrete,
with brick or marble facing, bond
courses for strength being introduced.
Such walls are thus often
coarse in character. By the extended
use of concrete, it may be
said that the Romans inaugurated
the employment of large masses
of irregular materials, reduced
into fragments and bound together
by mortar. These materials were
not special to any country, but
vertical resistance. Even for
transmitting the pressure between
the blocks only metal
cramps were used. The employment
of marble directly shaped
the development of the style.
One-sixteenth of an inch was
rubbed off the buildings on
completion, this polishing being
performed by slaves.
The Anta (Nos. 21, 26, 27 L, 30,
and 44 PJ was employed at extremities
and angles of cella walls.
c. Openings. Of minor importance,
the columnar treatment
giving the necessary light and
shade. Doorways are squareheaded,
and often crowned with
a cornice supported by consoles,
as in the fine example of the
north doorway at the Erechtheion,
Athens' (No. 37 D H).
Windows, except on rare occasions,
as shown on plate No. 28, were
not used in Temples, illumination
being obtained from doorways or
hypaethral openings (Nos. 20 c,
23 A, B, and 27 B, D).
consisted of fragments of stone,
brick or hard rock and quarry
debris, all of which sufficed for
the most important projects.
Great haste was necessary in the
execution to complete sufficiently
for use. and doubtless many
buildings were never perfectly
finished.
The pilaster was the Roman development
of the Greek Anta
(Nos. 38 F and 67 F).
c. Openings. These were important
features, being squareheaded
or circular, principally
the latter (No. 62 A). The
semicircle divided vertically by
two mullion piers was a favourite
type of window. Arches sometimes
had centering, supported
at the springing line, afterwards
filled up with brickwork,
thus producing the segmental
arch, common in the
third and fourth centuries A.D.
(No. 46 E), from the Basilica of
Constantine.