Roman wall-painting and social significance

2001 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 33-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rolf A. Tybout

During the last two decades a spate of publications forcefully brought to our attention the importance of the Roman house in the socio-political life of the élite in the late Republic and early Imperial period, both in Rome and in “provincial” towns like Pompeii, the metropolitan center of power setting the patterns for the lifestyle of local grandees. The focus is on the rôle of architecture in shaping the spatial, and thereby social, articulation of the domus. Literary sources concerning Roman domestic life and known for a long time are scrutinized for the light they might shed on the archaeological evidence, especially on the functions of rooms and other parts of the house. Roman wall-painting also attracts fresh attention in this context. The main focus in recent studies is on its synchronic formal variety, allowing painters, or perhaps rather their commissioners, to underline and at the same time refine the hierarchical organisation of space inherent in the architectural design.

2021 ◽  
pp. 291-314
Author(s):  
Silvana Costa

This chapter examines the role of images in the Roman domestic sphere, focusing on the contribution of paintings, mosaics, and other forms of representation to the construction of the Roman house as a place of self-representation and social interaction. Images were essential to the purposes of both shaping the environmental quality of domestic spaces and informing visitors about their character, function, and the behavior that was required from them. The case study of an apparently minor genre of Roman wall painting, that of still-life pictures (i.e., images of food and silverware), allows in-depth discussion of how the choice and understanding of subject matters depended on and relied upon shared mechanisms of recognition, as well as a tight semantics of meanings, values, and habits.


2002 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 346-348
Author(s):  
Rolf Tybout

My article on Roman wall-painting and social significance (JRA 14, 33-56) provoked two immediate reactions. I would like to show that both scholars misinterpreted my argument and intentions.Bergmarm's views are compatible in all respects with mine expressed in my article. In two introductory sections (33-42) I drew attention to some major misunderstandings and misrepresentations of the chronological model of Roman wall-painting developed by H. G. Beyen by scholars who have recently focused on paintings in their spatial and social context. B. agrees “that we lose much by neglecting the contributions of 19th- and 20th-c. scholars”. Presumably she took offence at what she calls my “ad hominem recriminations” In order to state my argument clearly, I quoted from several recent studies, mentioning their authors and places of publication. I pointed out as straightforwardly as possible that some of their views expressed are demonstrably untenable or, in some cases, not as innovative as suggested. This was done not to incriminate the authors but to bring some clarity in a discussion which risks becoming embroiled. Unfortunately, Bergmann does not question the validity of any of my specific “recriminations”, limiting herself to some general observations.She defines as my “main concern (…) that current scholars do not find Beyen's methods (and [my] own) worth emulating”, and prefer to employ other approaches “looking at paintings within larger ensembles and spatial networks” which “might shed some light on the rooms they embellished”. Nothing is less true. I agree with her that scholars understandably “find the search for and understanding of these relationships as appealing as attempting to validate Stufe C of Phase I of Beyen's Second Style” — I would say “far more appealing” That is the reason why I relegated that specific validation to an Appendix (53-56), in spite of the perspectives it opens up for social history (56), and devoted my main section (42-53; discussed neither by Bergmann or Hallett) to the study of wall-painting in its spatial and social dimensions (cf. also JRA 9 [1996] esp. 366-74). Moreover, I stressed that “the basic concepts underlying this [new] line of research are sound and stimulating” (34); that “any comprehensive account of Roman wall-painting should transcend the level of specialists' chronological ‘finger-exercises’ and encompass the synchronic dimension”; that “actually, this is a communis opinio by now, and rightly so” (36); and that the contributions of social historians able “to introduce more appropriate and refined concepts and vocabulary … can only be welcomed” (42). My real concern in sections 1 and 2 was to counter the current trend to ‘throw out the baby with the bath-water’, i.e., the diachronic with the synchronic dimension, since “a sound functional model of Roman wall-painting cannot dispense with careful attention to diachronic developments in both form and style” (36).


10.23856/2910 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 69-76
Author(s):  
Vitaly Vedeneyev ◽  
Olha Orlova

In the article examined, that there is a process of political reality constructing by means of the use the various manipulation technologies that allow popularizing "necessary" to the politicians’ ideas that afterwards grow into soil of the counted scenario the political development events. Attention applies on the phenomenon of mythological political life, considered through the prism of social life symbolizing psychological process, illustrates effectiveness of external influence mechanisms on mass consciousness at man. It is underlined that mechanisms of external influence on mass consciousness at man is unchanging sufficiently long time and exist almost so much how many exist human civilization. The role of mass-media is shown as to the instrument of virtualization of the real political space and means of this virtual reality constructing.


Author(s):  
Tatiana Medvedeva

The purpose of the article is to consider the content of the main changes provided for by amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation proposed by the President of the Russian Federation in January 202, regarding regulation of the legal status of the Federation Council. Attention, in particular, is focused on expanding the personnel powers of the upper house of the Russian parliament, as well as changing the formation of the Fe­deration Council. It is substantiated that the amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation contribute to the improvement of the system of checks and balances, including by strengthening the role of parliament. This goal is also served by securing directly in the Constitution of the Russian Federation the control powers of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, which for a long time was regulated solely in sectoral legislation. The article also proposes a solution to the issue of a different approach to the establishment of the term of office of senators from subjects and senators — representatives of the Russian Federation. The conclusion is made that the proposed amendments to the Constitution of the Russian Federation contribute to strengthening the role of the Federation Council in the political life of the country. Within the framework of this research, we used formal logical (analysis) and comparative legal methods.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 824-831
Author(s):  
Gulnorakhon Bakhtiyorjon Qizi Qosimova ◽  

Literature, as any type of panhuman activity, has its own canons and patterns that have been mastered and expanded by the classic writers of all nations of the worldover the centuries.In particular, Japanese literature is characterized by reliance on traditions, the active use of historical experience of previous periods literature and redefinition of the past, as well as an original and innovative point of view on reality.It is known that in the East the role of traditions has always been very important. Social behavior, the need to adhere to national traditions in the formation of the consciousness of each individual. Undoubtedly, this also applies to the cultural sphere of Japanese life, especially the work of writers. Direct references to past sources in the creative process were considered as important criteria in assessing the value of the work, and for a long time it was an indicator of the author’s level and extensive knowledge. The paper covers the role of literature traditions, the principles of interpretations classical Japanese and Chinese literary sources in the works of a talented representative of Japanese literature of the seventeenthcentury Ihara Saikaku. For this purpose, a selection of the interpreted works of the author and their analysis with a number of classical primary sources of Japanese and Chinese literature has been made. Through the analysis, the principles of redefinition, an innovative interpretation of examples of Japanese and Chinese literature of the past, as well as shifts in the system of artistic representations of that time have been revealed.


2001 ◽  
Vol 14 ◽  
pp. 414-416 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. H. Hallett

In his article in this issue, R. Tybout has some harsh words (38-39) for an article by S. Yerkes published in JRA 13. T.'s reaction seems to involve not so much a scholarly disagreement as a major misunderstanding of Yerkes' paper. I would like to offer a brief corrective to his comments.T. seems under the impression that the identification of Vitruvius' monstra is the main — or only — point of Yerkes' essay. This is probably because of the title. The paper is a radically reduced presentation of the argument of the author's master's thesis which was entitled “Neo-Attic motifs in Roman painting”. And the identification of some of the sources for the monstra — as motifs in much earlier Roman marble furnishings — is actually the main thrust of her argument. Her original title for the article also included a reference to “neo-Attic motifs” but that was omitted by the editor after it was submitted to JRA. T. is dismayed that Yerkes fails to cite the chapter on Vitruvius 7.5.3 ff. in W. Ehrhardt's monograph Stilgeschichtliche Untersuchungen (T. 1, n.l). Now, Yerkes is well aware of this work and cites it in her thesis, together with another paper Ehrhardt published on “Vitruv und die zeitgenössische Wandmalerei” in KJb 1991. So she could — and perhaps should — have included Ehrhardt's work in her notes, as T. suggests; perhaps including fuller references to other past scholarship too. But T. goes on to make the extraordinary claim (38 n.30) that Ehrhardt's chapter renders Yerkes' observations “largely superfluous”. I cannot follow T. here, for Ehrhardt's essay actually has a quite different aim and focus; and the differences are worth underlining.


2020 ◽  
pp. 143-174
Author(s):  
Milos Zivkovic

The paper discusses the visual representations of St. Mark of Ephesus, under-researched in previous scholarship, which have survived in several monuments of post-Byzantine wall painting in the Balkans. These depictions are analyzed as visual testimonies of the veneration of Mark of Ephesus in the period under consideration, i.e. as important indicators of the presence, continuity and dissemination of his cult a long time before his official canonization in the 18th century. The paper also offers an overview of the different iconographic versions of the images of St. Mark of Ephesus. Finally, it examines the possible reasons for the emergence of images representing this famed anti-Unionist metropolitan in the discussed monuments. In this context, the images of Mark of Ephesus are considered through the prism of their placement in a given iconographic program; wherever possible, the role of the ktetor and artist in their creation is examined.


Classics ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Rollinger

The question of what constitutes friendship—a true friend—is one that has been asked in many societies and historically contingent periods, and from a number of different vantage points. Just as the Romans interrogated themselves as to the precise nature of their amicitiae, so, too, have ancient historians and classicists investigated the vast field of that relationship. They have asked widely divergent questions: What was the philosophical or emotional basis of Roman friendship? How did Roman authors, from the comedies of the middle republic to later imperial works, discuss friendship? What role did it play in society, in economic or political contexts? How was the traditional notion of amicitia changed by the changing circumstances first of the imperial period and, more profoundly, by the advent of Christendom? Ancient historians and classicists have been attempting to answer these questions for a long time. Scholarly discourse can be broadly divided into two large fields, the first of which was (and is) concerned with the development of Roman philosophical thought on amicitia and, particularly, with Cicero’s famous treatise Laelius de amicitia. As the study of Roman amicitiae is rendered exceedingly complicated by the intentionally vague semantics of Roman terminology, which employs amicitia for a variety of social relationships, not all of which a majority of people would now term “friendships,” little consensus has been reached beyond strictly philological questions. In addition to these philological and philosophical enquiries, however, a second field emerged in the early 1980s, which emphasized the importance of Roman institutions of personal relationships for the study of Roman history, particularly in the field of politics. This perspective has been enlarged in recent years by a renewed interest in the role of amicitia in, e.g., the Roman economy and in the communicative and affiliative strategies that were essential in creating and maintaining amicitiae. Additionally, there appeared what might be called a “democratization” of friendship studies, with amicitia no longer seen as an exclusive phenomenon between elite Roman males. The advent of Christianity (but also of new philosophical schools) in Late Antiquity was accompanied by a distinct rethinking of amicitia from a Neoplatonic and Christian perspective. Schramm 2013 and White 1992 (both cited under General Overviews) offer exemplary approaches and further references, but the changing interpretations of amicitia in the later Roman world make this a distinctly different subject and consequently this period is excluded from this bibliography.


2008 ◽  
pp. 61-76
Author(s):  
A. Porshakov ◽  
A. Ponomarenko

The role of monetary factor in generating inflationary processes in Russia has stimulated various debates in social and scientific circles for a relatively long time. The authors show that identification of the specificity of relationship between money and inflation requires a complex approach based on statistical modeling and involving a wide range of indicators relevant for the price changes in the economy. As a result a model of inflation for Russia implying the decomposition of inflation dynamics into demand-side and supply-side factors is suggested. The main conclusion drawn is that during the recent years the volume of inflationary pressures in the Russian economy has been determined by the deviation of money supply from money demand, rather than by money supply alone. At the same time, monetary factor has a long-run spread over time impact on inflation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document