DOCSLIB.ORG

Abstraction of Visual Reality 76, 88–92 Aemilius Paullus, Monument

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Abstraction of Visual Reality 76, 88–92 Aemilius Paullus, Monument Cambridge University Press 0521662001 - The Language of Images in Roman Art Tonio Holscher Index More information Index abstraction ofvisual reality 76, 88–92 arete, aretai xxxiv, 75, 95 Aemilius Paullus, Monument of(Delphi) Arezzo, Augustan altar in (pls. 3, 32, 33) 11, (pl. 15) 29–30, 41 58 aemulatio xxxiv, 21 Aristotle 31–2 aeternitas xxxiv, 116 ‘Asianic’ rhetoric 47, 53, 121 Agrippa, portrait of(pl. 26) 48 Atarbos base (Athens) (pl. 45) 79 Alexander Mosaic (Pompeii) Athena (pls. 9–13) 23–9, 31–3, 41 bust of(Villa dei Papiri) 74 Alexander Sarcophagus (Sidon) 27 Promachos (Villa dei Papiri) 74 Alkamenes 63, 93, 120 Attalos I, Victory Monument of(Pergamon) Antinoos,¨ portraits of(pls. 40–43) 69 (pl. 14) 27–9 Antiphilos (painter) 120 Attalos II, Memorial of(Athens) 29 Antonine period 10, 63 Auctor ad Herennium 122–3 Antoninus Pius, Column ofxxi auctoritas xxxiv, 47, 52–4, 63, 93, 114, 120 Apelles 119–20 Augustus, Augustan period 10, 16, 47, 53, 63, Aphrodite 81, 111, 114–16 ofCapua, type of(pl. 34) 61, 65, 99 Prima Porta portrait of(pl. 23) 47 ofPraxiteles 94, 101 Apollo, portrayal of 69 Bacchus, portrayal of 65–9, 94, 97, 99 Lykeios, type of(pl. 38) 65–9, 94, Bacchus and Satyr group (Rome) 65 105 ‘baroque’ style xxiv, 10 Temple of, in Circo (Rome), frieze battle-scenes 15, 20, 23–34, 38–45, 114, 115 from 39, 115; statue in (pl. 49) 105, Beazley, J. D. xxiii 111 Berenson, B. xxii Tiber, type of 69, 83 Bianchi Bandinelli, R. xvii, xx, xxi, xxvi from Villa dei Papiri 74 Blanckenhagen, P. H. von xix, xxi, 3, 22 Ara Pacis (Rome) (pls. 28, 30, 46–48) 15–18, Bochum, Augustan portrait in (pl. 25) 48 49–54, 76–82, 114 Borbein, A. 3 small frieze of (pl. 44) 78–81, 83 Brendel, O. xvii, xix–xxi, xxiii, 3 ‘Ara Pietatis’ (Rome) 55 Archaic style in Greek art 11, 65, 69, 74, 86, Caesar, Julius 63 94, 99, 103 literary style of 45 archaising sculpture 103 triumphal paintings of 39 Ares Chares (sculptor) 122 Borghese type (pl. 36) 63 charis xxxiv, 93, 95, 98 Ludovisi type 61 Cicero 34, 47, 114, 122 148 © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 0521662001 - The Language of Images in Roman Art Tonio Holscher Index More information Index 149 Classical style Fortuna huiusce diei, Temple of, cult-statue in Greek painting 23, 119 from (pl. 51) 109 in Greek sculpture 7, 23, 26: as model for Fronto, M. Cornelius 95 Roman art 10, 11, 16–18, 21, 47–56, 61–9, 74–5, 77–8; special Roman esteem Gaul from Delos 35 for 92–6; use of, in Hellenistic art 90, Ludovisi (pl. 14) 32 104–9 ‘Gemma Augustea’ 41 ‘Classicism’ in Roman art xviii, xxiv, 6–8, 9, ‘genre-style’, concept of 22 10, 31, 47, 53–6, 76, 81, 104, 116, 126 genus floridum in oratory xxxiv, 121 potential conflict with political genus robustum xxxiv, 121, 123 concepts 102 genus subtile xxxiv, 121 ‘classicising’ art theory 92, 100, 119, 122 German, head ofa (Brussels) (pl. 52) clementia xxxiv, 88 109 communication, art as xxiii, 2, 7, 117, 126 ‘Grand Camee’´ 41 concordia xxxiv, 88 gratia xxxv, 96, 101, 120 connoisseurship xxii gravitas xxxv, 47, 48, 52, 114 content, subject, decisive roleˆ of 20, 58, 100 Greek art, accessibility of 5, 8 cura xxxiv, 120 see also Archaic style; Classical style; Hellenistic art; ‘High Classical’; Late Damophon ofMessene 104 Classical; Late fifth-century (‘Rich Danaid group (Villa dei Papiri) 75 Style’); ‘Severe Style’ (Early Classical) decor´ xxxiv, 61, 93, 97, 120 Delos, painted altar from (pl. 8) 16 Hadrianic period 10, 69, 115, 116 Demetrios (painter) 38 Hamberg, P. G. xxix dignitas xxxiv, 52–6 Hellenistic art 23, 27–34, 86–7, 94–5, diligentia xxxiv, 93, 101, 120 103–9 Dio Chrysostom 93 Roman use of 10–11, 16, 21, 38, 39, 41–5, Dionysios ofHalikarnassos 95, 122 47, 59, 69, 89–90, 96, 97, 99, 103–9, 114, Domitius Ahenobarbus, Altar ofxxi 115 Doryphoros: see Polykleitos Hellenistic art theory 92, 100, 119, 122 Duris ofSamos 31–2 Hermes (Mercury), portrayal of 61, 69 ‘High Classical’ Greek art 7, 11, 16, 53, 63, Eco, U. xxv, xxx 69, 75, 79, 97 Egyptian art xvii Himmelmann, N. xvi, 111 elegantia xxxiv, 93 ‘historical’ reliefs 6, 117 enargeia xxxiv, 32–3, 38 Hostilius Mancinus, L., triumphal painting Ephesos, Monument ofLucius Verus from of 44 (Vienna) (pls. 5, 22) 16, 20, 43 hupsos xxxv, 123 ethos xxxiv, 92 Etruria, Etruscan art xvii, 79 iconology, concept ofxxii, xxix, 4, 116 exemplum xxxiv, 21, 89 idealising sculpture 2, 6, 58, 61–9, 74–5, 91, ‘expressive values’ in Roman art 92, 93, 95–6 117 ‘Idolino’, the (Florence) (pl. 1) 11 ‘face for the age’ 116 ‘Ikarios relief’ 105 facilitas xxxiv, 120 imitatio xxxv, 21 felicitas xxxiv, 116 ingenium xxxv, 120 Flavian period xxi, 11, 96, 115 interpretatio xxxv, 21 forms, formal analysis xv, xxi, xxii, xxvi, 1, Isokrates 35 20, 98, 120, 125 Italy, Italic art xvii, 79 © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 0521662001 - The Language of Images in Roman Art Tonio Holscher Index More information 150 Index Julio-Claudian period 115, 116 Odysseus and companions, group of (Sperlonga) 33 Kalamis 95, 120 oratory, styles of 47, 53, 74, 114, 121–2, 123 Kallimachos 93, 95, 98 Kallistratos 94 paideia xxxv, 74 kallos xxxv, 93, 98 Palestrina, relieffrom 39 kalokagathia, kalos kai agathos xxxv, 75, 93 panel-painting, Roman Republican 38, 44 Kaschnitz-Weinberg, G. xx, xxv Panofsky, E. xvi, xxii–xxiv, 1 Parrhasios 119 labor xxxv, 44–5, 90 Parthenon frieze (pls. 31, 27, 29) 15, 49–51, Laokoon¨ group xxviii, 33 56, 77–8 Late Antique art xviii Pasiteles 109, 112 Late Classical Greek art 65–9, 77, 104 Pergamon Late fifth-century (‘Rich Style’) Greek Celtic monuments 19, 22, 24, 29 (see also art 58, 69, 94, 122 Attalos I, II) Lepcis Magna, Antinoos¨ portrait from Telephos Frieze (pl. 6) 16 (pl. 42) 69 ‘period styles’, concept ofxxiv, 10, 14, 115–16 leptotes xxxv, 93, 95 peripeteia xxxv, 36 Licinius Calvus, C., rhetorical style of 114 Perseus, statue of(Copenhagen) 61 Livy, style of 45 Pheidias 7, 52, 93, 95, 97–8, 109, 119–20 Lucian 45 Olympian Zeus of 93, 102 style of 122 Phylarchos 31 Lucius Verus, Monument of(Ephesos) (pls. 5, pietas xxxv, 74, 88, 90 22) 16, 20, 43 Pliny the Elder 101, 122 ‘Ludovisi Gaul’ (pl. 14) 32 Polybios 38, 47 Lysippos 59–61, 69, 76, 94–5, 97, 119, 122 Polykleitos 7, 10, 11, 52, 59, 69, 75, 93, 97, 115–16, 119–20, 122 maiestas xxxv, 52, 90, 93, 96–7, 99, 105, 120 Doryphoros of(pl. 24) 48, 61, 69, 75, 93 Mantua, battle frieze in (pl. 16) 15, 39 Pompeii, ‘riot’ painting from 44 Marchand, S. xxvii Pompey, triumphal paintings of 38 Marcus Aurelius pondus xxxv, 52, 63, 93, 96–7, 105, 120 Column of 44, 63 portrait group (Rome, Museo Nazionale reliefsof(Arch ofConstantine) 55, 88, Romano) (pl. 35) 63 116 portraiture, Roman 6, 105, 116–17 Marsyas 33 Praxiteles 61, 94, 97, 99, 119, 122 megaloprepeia, megaloprepes xxxv, 93, 123 Protogenes (painter) 120 megethos xxxv, 93, 98 pulchritudo xxxv, 93, 97, 98 Melos, Poseidon from 16 Metrodoros ofChios, grave-reliefof 56 Quintilian 48, 61, 63, 76, 93, 94, 95, 119, ‘modes’, artistic 22 121–2 Morelli, G. xxiii Myron 95, 120, 122 realism, persistence ofin Roman art 91 mythological reliefs 6, 11 rhetoric: see oratory, styles of ‘Rich Style’: see Late fifth-century Greek art Naples, Antinoos¨ portrait in (pl. 41) 69 Riegl, A. xx, xxiii, xxv ‘neo-Attic’ art 58, 82, 104, 109 Rodenwaldt, G. xx, 21 Nike 61 Roman Republic, art of 7, 38, 116 ofBrescia 63 Rome Niobe group 33 Banca Nazionale, Antinoos¨ portrait in nobilitas xxxv, 74 (pl. 40) 69 © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 0521662001 - The Language of Images in Roman Art Tonio Holscher Index More information Index 151 Capitoline Museum, colossal head of ‘temporal styles’: see ‘period styles’ Fortuna (pl. 51) 109 ‘Thermae Ruler’ (pl. 50) 105 Conservatori Palace, Antinoos¨ portrait in Timarchides (sculptor) 105, 111 (pl. 43) 69 Titus, Arch of 55, 81 Museo Nazionale Romano: group of ‘tragic’ historiography 31–4, 38, 47 Bacchus and Satyr (pl. 37) 65; portrait Trajan group (pl. 35) 63; ‘Thermae Ruler’ Arch of(Beneventum) 55, 81, 111 (pl. 50) 105 Column of(pls. 19–21) 41–4, 63, 89–90 ‘Great Trajanic Frieze’ (Arch of sacrifice, significance of 79–81, 90 Constantine) (pls. 17–18) 41 Salamis, grave-relieffrom (pl. 7) 16, 22 typology, types 14, 20, 76, 113 Sallust, style of 45 sanctitas xxxv, 48, 52 Vatican, statue ofyouth in (Flavian) (pl. 2) sarcophagi, ‘biographical’ 88, 90 11 satyrs, portrayal of 65, 69, 76, 83, 96, 99 Venus, portrayal of 63, 69 Schalles, H.-J. 35, 37 de Milo 61–3 Schlosser, J. von xxv veritas xxxv, 94, 96, 97, 119 semantic system, semantics xvii–xviii, xxi, Vespasian, portraits of 10 xxiii–xxv, 2–3, 58, 86–100, 113–16, 118, Victoria, Victory 61–3 125–7 ‘Vienna School’ xx, xxv, xxvi, xxx Greek origins of 103–11 Villa Albani versatility of 92 reliefwith Polyphemos in (pl. 4) 11 semnotes, semnon xxxv, 93, 95, 98 statue ofBacchus (pl. 39) 65 Septimius Severus, Arch of 44 Villa dei Papiri (Herculaneum), display ‘Severe Style’ in Greek art (early at 74–6 Classical) 65–9, 74, 75, 95, 97, 122 virtus, virtutes xxxv, 88–9, 95 Simon, E.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Virgil, Aeneid 11 (Pallas & Camilla) 1–224, 498–521, 532–96, 648–89, 725–835 G
    Virgil, Aeneid 11 (Pallas & Camilla) 1–224, 498–521, 532–96, 648–89, 725–835 G Latin text, study aids with vocabulary, and commentary ILDENHARD INGO GILDENHARD AND JOHN HENDERSON A dead boy (Pallas) and the death of a girl (Camilla) loom over the opening and the closing part of the eleventh book of the Aeneid. Following the savage slaughter in Aeneid 10, the AND book opens in a mournful mood as the warring parti es revisit yesterday’s killing fi elds to att end to their dead. One casualty in parti cular commands att enti on: Aeneas’ protégé H Pallas, killed and despoiled by Turnus in the previous book. His death plunges his father ENDERSON Evander and his surrogate father Aeneas into heart-rending despair – and helps set up the foundati onal act of sacrifi cial brutality that caps the poem, when Aeneas seeks to avenge Pallas by slaying Turnus in wrathful fury. Turnus’ departure from the living is prefi gured by that of his ally Camilla, a maiden schooled in the marti al arts, who sets the mold for warrior princesses such as Xena and Wonder Woman. In the fi nal third of Aeneid 11, she wreaks havoc not just on the batt lefi eld but on gender stereotypes and the conventi ons of the epic genre, before she too succumbs to a premature death. In the porti ons of the book selected for discussion here, Virgil off ers some of his most emoti ve (and disturbing) meditati ons on the tragic nature of human existence – but also knows how to lighten the mood with a bit of drag.
    [Show full text]
  • Front Matter
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-02320-8 - Campus Martius: The Field of Mars in the Life of Ancient Rome Paul W. Jacobs II and Diane Atnally Conlin Frontmatter More information CAMPUS MARTIUS A mosquito-infested and swampy plain lying north of the city walls, Rome’s Campus Martius, or Field of Mars, was used for much of the Roman Republic as a military training ground and as a site for celebratory rituals and the occasional political assembly. Initially punctuated with temples vowed by victorious generals, during the imperial era it became filled with extraordinary baths, theaters, porticoes, aqueducts, and other structures – many of which were architectural firsts for the capital. This book explores the myriad factors that contributed to the transformation of the Campus Martius from an occasionally visited space to a crowded center of daily activity. It presents a case study of the repurposing of urban landscape in the Roman world and explores how existing topographical features that fit well with the republic’s needs ultimately attracted architecture that forever transformed those features but still resonated with the area’s original military and ceremonial traditions. Paul W. Jacobs II is an independent scholar who focuses on ancient Rome and its topographical development. A graduate of Harvard College and the University of Virginia Law School, and a litigator by training, Jacobs has practiced and published in the area of voting rights, where knowledge of demographics, mapmaking, and geography is essential. He has spent extensive time in Rome and has studied the ancient city and its development for decades. Diane Atnally Conlin is Associate Professor of Classics at the University of Colorado, Boulder.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction: “This Place Was Holiest of All”
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-02320-8 - Campus Martius: The Field of Mars in the Life of Ancient Rome Paul W. Jacobs II and Diane Atnally Conlin Excerpt More information INTRODUCTION: “THIS PLACE WAS HOLIEST OF ALL” During or just after the reign of Rome’s first emperor Augustus (r. 27 b.c.e.– 14 c.e.), the Greek geographer Strabo penned his work Geographica and provided a valuable description of many of the peoples and places in the Greco-Roman world.1 When Strabo reported the “best accredited story of the founding of Rome,” he recounted the tale, “partly fabulous but partly closer to the truth,” of Rhea Silvia, a woman forced by her uncle Amulius to become a Vestal Virgin to assure she would remain childless, thereby pre- venting the birth of a potential political rival.2 Notwithstanding her sacred inviolability, Rhea Silvia was impregnated by the god Mars. She gave birth to Romulus and Remus, semidivine twin boys who grew into manhood, defeated Amulius and his sons, and established the foundations for the city of Rome. Lacking natural defenses and usable arable land, the location for Rome’s foundation was suitable “more as a matter of necessity than of choice.”3 For his part, Strabo forgave the early Romans for not beautifying their city, citing their understandable preoccupation with matters of government and war. The successors to Rome’s mythical founders would eventually reduce its vulnerability by building protective circuit walls and defensive gates as early as the fourth century b.c.e. By the reign of Augustus, however, Strabo noted that circumstances had indeed changed.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapitre 11. Le Dieu Honos
    Mathieu Jacotot Question d'honneur Les notions d'honos, honestum et honestas dans la République romaine antique Publications de l’École française de Rome Chapitre 11. Le dieu Honos DOI : 10.4000/books.efr.5506 Éditeur : Publications de l’École française de Rome Lieu d'édition : Publications de l’École française de Rome Année d'édition : 2013 Date de mise en ligne : 8 juillet 2019 Collection : Collection de l'École française de Rome ISBN électronique : 9782728313617 http://books.openedition.org Référence électronique JACOTOT, Mathieu. Chapitre 11. Le dieu Honos In : Question d'honneur : Les notions d'honos, honestum et honestas dans la République romaine antique [en ligne]. Rome : Publications de l’École française de Rome, 2013 (généré le 08 février 2021). Disponible sur Internet : <http://books.openedition.org/efr/ 5506>. ISBN : 9782728313617. DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/books.efr.5506. CHAPITRE 11 LE DIEU HONOS INTRODUCTION Les chapitres précédents ont surtout abordé la pratique de l’honos et de l’honestas. Mais l’honos a la particularité d’avoir à Rome un aspect divin car Honos est aussi un dieu du panthéon. Comme la libertas, la concordia ou la uirtus, l’honos est à la fois une pratique humaine et une divinité, et la frontière qui sépare ces deux aspects n’est pas parfaitement étanche1. Notre travail ne peut donc faire l’éco- nomie d’une approche théologique, d’autant que l’honos est, parmi les nombreuses notions qui touchent au prestige et à la renommée, la seule à faire l’objet d’un culte à l’époque républicaine2.
    [Show full text]
  • La Maestà Degli Dei Come Spettacolo Teatrale. Eugenio La Rocca
    Saggio in catalogo La maestà degli dei come spettacolo teatrale. Eugenio La Rocca Le statue di culto colossali. Vedendo una a fianco dell’altra la serie di teste o di frammenti di statue di culto colossali di età ellenistica, la prima impressione che si coglie è di noiosa monotonia. I volti freddi, levigati, talora con le labbra imbronciate, talaltra con i grandi occhi spalancati in un vuoto che non coinvolge lo spettatore, sembrano tutti uguali, non esprimono emozioni né sentimenti, assomigliano, a ben vedere, alle teste porcellanate di vecchie bambole. Anche quando sono atteggiate secondo schemi che vogliono comunicare passione o sentimento o tensione, l’inerzia delle superfici, la retorica dell’impostazione ci respingono. Si può sostenere a ragione che una delle lacune principali nella storia della cultura del mondo classico sia l’incapacità di chiederci perché proprio le statue di culto, la proiezione visibile di come i Greci intendessero i loro dei, ci trasmettano una tale indifferenza emotiva. Di per sé la nostra reazione non conta molto. E’ piuttosto la reazione degli spettatori dell’epoca, dei fedeli che affollavano i santuari e i luoghi di culto, a dover essere compresa e interpretata. Solo attraverso i loro occhi potremo tentare di capire noi stessi l’essenza smarrita di queste immagini. In realtà quanto vediamo è solo la misera parte di un insieme scenografico talora impressionante per impatto. Le teste preservate erano pertinenti a grandi statue, normalmente più grandi del vero: potevano raggiungere i sei o gli otto metri di altezza, senza contare le due principali opere fidiache, l’Athena Parthenos e lo Zeus di Olimpia, alte intorno ai 12,50 m di altezza, compresi i loro podii.
    [Show full text]
  • Republican Rome Looks at Pergamon Author(S): Ann Kuttner Reviewed Work(S): Source: Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, Vol
    Department of the Classics, Harvard University Republican Rome Looks at Pergamon Author(s): Ann Kuttner Reviewed work(s): Source: Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, Vol. 97, Greece in Rome: Influence, Integration, Resistance (1995), pp. 157-178 Published by: Department of the Classics, Harvard University Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/311304 . Accessed: 27/01/2012 17:20 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp 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 [email protected]. Department of the Classics, Harvard University is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Harvard Studies in Classical Philology. http://www.jstor.org REPUBLICAN ROME LOOKS AT PERGAMON* ANN KUTTNER HIS is a case study in the Roman reception of Hellenistic art, for- T mulated as an analytic survey of Roman response to one major Hellenistic center, Pergamon. In 1986 Philip Hardie recognized that Attalid ideological mythographystructured major iconographiesin Vir- gil's Aeneid; he rightly queried why he could find no art-historicaldis- cussion of similar visual discourse at the end of the Republic and in Augustus' reign.' I see this sketch as
    [Show full text]
  • Index Locorum
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-09052-1 - Religious Deviance in the Roman World: Superstition or Individuality? Jörg Rüpke Index More information Index locorum Acts 4 Cic. Leg . 2.25, 29 17, 100 Cic. Leg. 2.26–69, 103 AE 1987, 163, 33 Cic. Leg. 2.28, 30 , 98 AE 1996, 685, 77 Cic. Leg . 2.32–3, 28 Amm. Marc. 19.2.12, 85 Cic. Leg. 2.35, 103 Apul. Apol. 102, 66 Cic. Leg. 2.35–7, 30 Apul. Apol. 57.2, 66 Cic. Leg . 2.37, 97 Apul. Apol. 58ff ., 66 Cic. Leg. 2.41, 30 , 104 Apul. Deo Socr. 3, 101 Cic. Leg. 2.42, 104 Apul. Met. 3.19.4, 101 Cic. Leg . 2.45, 96 Ascon. Corn . p. 75 Clark, 106 Cic. Leg . 2.46–68, 96 Aug. Civ . 6.3, 28 Cic. Leg . 2.47, 14 Aug. Civ . 6.10, 48 , 49 , 50 , 57 Cic. Leg . 2. 52–3, 13 Aug. Civ. 6.11, 49 Cic. Leg . 2.55, 81 Cic. Leg. 3.6, 24 Cass. Dio 43.45, 61 Cic. Leg. 3.48, 28 Cic. Ad Brut. 10.1, 100 Cic. Leg. 3.49, 28 Cic. Balb. 55, 38 Cic. Leg. agr. 2.16–18, 78 Cic. Brut. 120, 100 Cic. Nat . 1.76–84, 55 Cic. Cael. 40, 100 Cic. Nat. 1.81, 51 Cic. Div . 1.19, 59 Cic. Nat. 1.83, 54 Cic. Div. 1.77f., 4 Cic. Nat. 1.84, 56 Cic. Div. 1.81, 55 Cic. Nat . 3.39, 104 Cic. Div. 1.92, 38 Cic. Nat .
    [Show full text]
  • Lez04 Archittardorep [Modalità Compatibilità]
    • TECNICA COSTRUTTIVA IL CICLO DELLA CALCE ROMANA: LA CALCE (LIME ) • pietre calcaree = CaCO3, cottura a 900° produce: • Calce viva = CaO (ossido di calcio) + CO2 (anidride carbonica). • In vasche di spegnimento con acqua CaO + H2O, si ottiene (reazione, temperature di 300°) Calce spenta = Ca(OH)2 (idrossido di calcio). • Con successive aggiunte • Presa della malta per essiccamento e d’acqua si ottiene il carbonatazione: grassello Ca(OH)2 – grassello o il latte di calce: H2O (perdita d’acqua) + CO2 (anidride pasta bianca più o meno carbonica nell’aria) = CaCO3, fino alla densa; indurisce all’aria, ma se bagnata ritorna completa cristallizzazione e ritorno allo malleabile. stato di pietra calcarea. • Malta: ottenuta unendo calce e sabbia o inerti. • La malta, secondo il contenuto di calce, può essere – Argillosa: terra argillosa e paglia – Taio : terra contenente calcio, più inerti – Malta di calce: sabbia o pozzolana (2 parti) + grassello (1) + acqua. – Malta idraulica (presa anche sott’acqua): si ottiene con calce, sabbia e laterizi polverizzati (inerti idraulici) che fanno presa anche sott’acqua. Si ottiene anche con calce + pozzolana (sabbia vulcanica). • Cocciopesto: – Calce, sabbia, pozzolana e laterizi frantumati: impermeabilizzante. COSTRUZIONE DI ARCHI E VOLTE A BOTTE IN OPERA CEMENTIZIA Ostia. Esempi di opus reticulatum (metà I sec. a.C. – inizi I sec. d.C.): cortine che utilizzano cunei in tufo a base quadrata che formano un reticolo; e opus mixtum (I-II sec. d.C.): che unisce le cortine in opus reticolatum a ricorsi e angolature in opus testaceum . In alto: Esempio di centina in legno (moderna, per restauro) sul tipo di quelle antiche.
    [Show full text]
  • Download a Sample Issue
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY The Journal of the Archaeological Institute of America editor-in-chief advisory board Sheila Dillon Carla M. Antonaccio, ex officio Duke University Duke University Judith Barringer director of publishing University of Edinburgh Kimberly Bowes Madeleine J. Donachie University of Pennsylvania Lidewijde de Jong editor University of Groningen Jan Driessen Katrina Swartz Université Catholique de Louvain Donald C. Haggis electronic content editor University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Vanessa Lord Christopher H. Hallett University of California, Berkeley editors, book reviews Yannis Hamilakis University of Southampton Derek B. Counts Tamar Hodos Elisabetta Cova University of Bristol University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee P. Nick Kardulias College of Wooster editorial assistants Mark Lawall University of Manitoba Elizabeth Baltes John Ma Kimberly Huynh Oxford University Rebecca Ingram David O’Connor Lindsey Mazurek Institute of Fine Arts, New York University Matthew Rogan D.T. Potts Jennifer Sacher Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, New York University Betsey A. Robinson Elma Sanders Vanderbilt University Christopher Roosevelt Boston University R.R.R. Smith Oxford University Andrew Stewart University of California, Berkeley Nicola Terrenato University of Michigan Kathryn Topper University of Washington Peter van Dommelen Brown University Bonna D. Wescoat Emory University James Wright American School of Classical Studies at Athens THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ARCHAEOLOGY, the journal of the Archaeological
    [Show full text]
  • The Definition of Public Space in Republican Rome by Amy Russell
    The Definition of Public Space in Republican Rome By Amy Russell A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Ancient History and Mediterranean Archaeology and the Designated Emphasis in Gender and Women’s Studies in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Erich S. Gruen, Chair Professor Carlos F. Noreña Professor Mark Griffith Professor Andrew Wallace-Hadrill Spring 2011 © Copyright by Amy Russell 2011 All Rights Reserved Abstract The Definition of Public Space in Republican Rome by Amy Russell Doctor of Philosophy in Ancient History and Mediterranean Archaeology and the Designated Emphasis in Gender and Women’s Studies Professor Erich S. Gruen, Chair This dissertation uses a combination of literary and archeological evidence to ask how Romans understood and defined public space in Rome during the Republic. The definition of concepts of ‘public’ and ‘private’ in Roman culture differed from that current in modern Western discourse, but just like modern definitions, it was ambiguous and manipulable. Taking public space as a starting-point offers new insights into the Roman concepts, and a behavioural approach, aided by insights from space syntax theory, allows for a partial reconstruction of the diversity of spatial experience in the city. Traditionally, lack of behavioural control has been associated with private space, but for the majority of the population, who were not householders, it was public spaces which were characterised by greater freedom of access and behaviour. Public space was not a monolith, but offered a variety of spatial experiences and was experienced differently by different groups.
    [Show full text]
  • Durham E-Theses
    Durham E-Theses Monuments and Inscriptions in Republican Rome: Linguistic Framework for Interpreting Art and Text LUCI, FABIO How to cite: LUCI, FABIO (2019) Monuments and Inscriptions in Republican Rome: Linguistic Framework for Interpreting Art and Text, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/13047/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 Fabio Luci Monuments and Inscriptions in Republican Rome: Linguistic Framework for Interpreting Art and Text ABSTRACT This dissertation focusses on the interaction between monuments and inscriptions in Republican Rome, by using a linguistic framework to demonstrate that a strong interconnection exists between them. The communicative power of Roman art was one of the most important way for ambitious men to self-present and to compete in the political arena in Rome, but only by combining the visual elements of their monuments with the language of inscriptions it was possible to make the most of its communicative power.
    [Show full text]
  • Spaziofilosofico 3/2014
    © SpazioFilosofico 2014 – ISSN: 2038-6788 SPAZIOFILOSOFICO 3/2014 Fondatori Enrico Guglielminetti Luciana Regina Comitato scientifico Enrico Guglielminetti (Direttore) Silvia Benso Gianfranco Dalmasso Ugo Perone Luciana Regina Brian Schroeder © 2014 SpazioFilosofico Tutti i diritti riservati ISSN: 2038-6788 402 © SpazioFilosofico 2014 – ISSN: 2038-6788 Gli articoli filosofici della rivista sono sottoposti a blind review. La pubblicazione è subordinata per ogni articolo all’approvazione dei valutatori anonimi esterni alla direzione e all’accoglimento di eventuali richieste di revisione. 403 © SpazioFilosofico 2014 – ISSN: 2038-6788 SPAZIOFILOSOFICO 3/2014 FORTUNA a cura di Enrico Guglielminetti © SpazioFilosofico 2014 – ISSN: 2038-6788 INDICE E. GUGLIELMINETTI-L. REGINA, Il centro della fortuna. Editoriale 411 E. GUGLIELMINETTI-L. REGINA, The Core of Fortune. Editorial 413 TEORIA J.D. LYONS, The French Aesthetics of Contingency 417 G. PANIZZA, Fortuna, caso e giustizia distributiva 439 G. CUOZZO, Fortuna e azzardo ai tempi del capitalismo. La visione “cornucopiana” del mondo e la fuggevolezza dell’occasio 447 A. BERTINETTO, Sorte estetica. Sulla (s)fortuna di un concetto 463 POLITICHE E. BENNER, Questa inconstante dea: Machiavelli’s amoral fortuna 481 B. MAGNI, Quanta fortuna? Machiavelli e il dilemma della contingenza 501 K.-C. TAN, Luck and Institutions: A Defense of Institutional Luck Egalitarianism 513 PRATICHE M. DOTTI, Alterna fortuna. Sul dispendio del “più minuto popolo” 525 STUDI R.L. CARDULLO, Il concetto di fortuna (τύχη ed εὐτυχία) in Aristotele 541 A. BALBO, Ricognizioni sul tema della fortuna in Seneca 555 R. CAPELLI, «Vous faites fortune deesse…». I volti e i risvolti di Fortuna nel Roman de la Rose 567 S. STROPPA, L’esperienza delle cose: la riflessione di Petrarca sul potere di Fortuna 589 O.
    [Show full text]