ROMAN SCULPTURE, Part 1: Free Standing Portrait Sculpture
Roman sculpture goes back to the Etruscans in the 6th century BC who moulded terracotta (baked clay)
figurines of their dead on funeral urns or tombs.
In addition, the ancient Romans preserved wax facial images of their ancestors, which were kept in
the atrium and paraded in funeral processions.
Facial portraiture in Rome may have been helped by the Roman custom of worshipping a man’s genius.
This guardian spirit of the dead man was naturally depicted by a portrait sculpture and these imagines
(likenesses) displayed in the atrium were not simply statues but believed to be visual presences of
invisible presences. The statue was believed to be alive in some way.
Greek sculpture naturally influenced Roman sculpture. Greek craftsmen had been coming to Rome since
the 3rd century BC and in the 2nd century BC, when Greece became a province of Rome, many antique
sculptures were taken back to Rome from Greece. A lively replica industry flourished at this time where
copies of the classical masterpieces could be bought by wealthy Romans; though the copies were executed
mainly by Greek master sculptors. In fact there is no evidence that the great Roman sculptures were
made by Roman sculptors. Though surely the Roman market influenced the Greek sculptors to
change style. Many of the originals were lost, so the Roman copies survive as the only echoes of classical
Greek sculpture, e.g. the Roman copy of the Pericles of Cresilas.
Greek sculpture however is typified by idealism. Greek portrait statues are more beautiful, younger and
symmetrical than anyone could ever be. They are also typically expressionless, so much so that they look
“brainwashed” as Wheeler puts it.
Whilst Roman sculptors often made their subjects more handsome than they really were, they did not
sacrifice their uniquely personal characteristics; hence Roman sculpture is typified by realism.
The first thoroughly Roman portrait sculptures didn’t appear until as late the first century BC and the
realistic style reached its climax during the reign of the dictator Sulla 75-65BC. Idealism dominated
again during the reign of Augustus 31BC – 41AD.
These portraits, executed in stone, marble and bronze, expressed to perfection the Roman ideals
of dignitas et gravitas.
Dignitas implies rank, prestige, honour and respect. As an artistic convention it was a reaction
to the Greek aesthetic of nudity. Roman statues wore clothes.
Gravitas implies depth of character, solemnity and seriousness. Roman statues never smile or portray
any emotion other than gravitas yet they do look like people with whom you could hold a conversation,
unlike The Elgin Marbles from the Parthenon at Athens. In these famous works expressionless blank faces
do battle with equally expressionless and thus unrealistic lapiths and centaurs.
ROMAN SCULPTURE, Part 1: Free Standing Portrait Sculpture
These photos are NOT from Wheeler. You will only be examined on Wheeler’s photos.
These photos simply give you a better understanding of what he is talking about.
THE PERICLES OF CRESILAS (p.161, il.141) is typical of Greek
idealism, which is why Wheeler includes it in his book. This sculpture
acts as a contrast to Roman realism, which is what he is trying to
introduce.
Cresilas was a master Athenian sculptor of the 5th century: the classical
period of Greek history.
The bust is a herm (a kind of bollard) erected originally in the Athenian
agora (central market place).
On the point of Greek idealism, Wheeler says of Cresilas’ Pericles that it
is “intellectually a barber’s dummy” because it looks “brainwashed”.
If asked, it is worth comparing Perciles here to Philip of Arabia.
The helmet also cleverly conceals the elongated skull of the subject to
present Pericles in an ideal symmetrical way, quite different to how a
Roman realist would have approached a portrait of the famous Athenian
statesman of the classical period.
PORTRAIT BUST OF OLD WOMAN (p.170, il.150)
Executed “in callously realistic style”
Dates to 75BC – climax of Roman realism under the reign of the dictator Sulla
Her harsh features are accentuated by the thin hair (etched on rather than
a separate wig) which is pulled into a tight bun at the back of the head called a
nottus
Wedge shaped termination of the neck suggests the bust was originally set
into a monument; probably a tombstone
Her eyes however do not engage us. They are blank like the Pericles of Cresilas.
PORTRAIT BUST OF AGED WOMAN (p.171, il.152)
Another head of an aged woman, from Tripoli in Libya, dates from around
200-300 AD and still shows the Roman fondness for realism. Here we see an
extremely realistic rendering of the eyes by the use of a solid V-shaped
segment to simulate the reflection of light off the pupil (contrast with image
above). Note also the wrinkles, the ears and the intricate pattern in the skull-cap.
Wheeler: ‘The head…is characteristic of the cruder portraiture of the third
century AD’.
ROMAN SCULPTURE, Part 1: Free Standing Portrait Sculpture
PORTRAIT STATUE OF PATRICIAN CARRYING FUNERAL
BUSTS (p.163, il.142)
The importance of men in the Roman family unit is emphatic here. We recall
pious Aeneas in Book 2 of Virgil’s Aeneid carrying his father and leading his
son by the hand whilst his wife lags behind and is lost. In a similar way, this
pious pater familias of a patrician (aristocratic) family holds the portraits of
his father and his son. Like the image of piety from Aeneid 2, here too we
have three generations of a patrician clan; all men.
Note the family resemblance between all three faces; especially the
noses, chin lines and the eyes.
This statue is a variation on the theme of death masks. All three men are
dead. It is a reincarnation of the early Roman funerary procession that
reflects the religious austerity of the Augustan age to which it likely dates.
This statue has a funerary function. It was probably kept in the atrium
of a patrician villa. This three-in-one image personified a family’s
ancestors. They were believed to dwell in the house as genii (guardian
spirits) and these imagines (likenesses) were felt to be alive in some way.
Note the clever use of the post to stabilise and re-enforce the marble
statue. Also the complicated network of realistic folds in the toga that are
carved with precision and the V-shaped segments in the eyes again.








Emperor Commodus (p.170, il.151)
Contemporary portrait bust made during his reign (182-192AD)
Portrayed as the hero Hercules bearing his trademark club in his right
hand (see Greek vase painting below)
The ‘principle of abbreviation’ – Wheeler
His wearing of the pelt of the Nemean Lion is symbolic of Hercules’ first
labour for immortality whilst the fact that he is holding a golden apple
from the garden of the Hesperides in his left hand is symbolic of
Hercules’ last labour. The pelt and the apple act as brackets: the other
labours are implied. Commodus is Hercules
The emperor’s hair is especially striking. The curls were rendered by
a drill and left rough whilst the skin was polished to a fine sheen.
The hair was also originally painted in gold leaf, which would have
struck a sharp contrast to his beautiful snow-white complexion.
The sculptor has also rendered muscles, veins, bone structure and hair in
vivid realism.
The sculptor however must have felt very sure of his patron’s “blind
vanity” because he has presented the youthful Commodus as a dreadful
parody of the hero Hercules.
Notice the weak arms, the effeminate manner and the air of superiority
in his face.
“No doubt it delighted, as it revealed, the sadistic pervert whom it
has so faithfully immortalised.” – Wheeler
This piece is contemporary, which means Commodus probably commissioned it;
possibly to commemorate his re-enactment of Hercules’ deeds in the Circus.
Commodus loved gladiator games and even performed in the arena himself. He
famously clubbed several Roman beggars dressed up as serpents to death with a
club much like the one he is holding.
Talk about rubbing it in…
ROMAN SCULPTURE, Part 1: Free Standing Portrait Sculpture
PORTRAIT BUST OF PHILIP THE ARABIAN
Emperor 244-249AD (p.171, il.153)
The marble bust mercilessly reveals “the anxious,
shifty, irate, opportunist character of this
insignificant ruler” (he was allegedly the son of a
notorious Arabian brigand).
If the artist was no flatterer, it may have been because
his patron asked to be shown “warts and all.”
The turned head was a formal device employed by
sculptors of the early emperors in portraits to suggest
being caught in a moment of time, but Philip’s eyes
do not engage the viewer. Instead they look up as if
seeking divine inspiration.
We see a trace of humanity in this brute’s eyes – even a
dignity that demands recognition.
The eyes are rendered with the V-shaped segment to
simulate the reflection of light on the pupil.
Philip’s image is severe. We see the lines of a face
weathered by sun and worry and his tightly cropped hair.
This man was anything but vain.
FREE STANDING IN EXAM
2009: old woman & aged woman – comparison – the eyes?
2008: relief
2007: Patrician carrying busts
2006: reliefs
2005: Commodus & Philip the Arabian – comparison
2004: relief
2003: Trajans column
2002: Ara Pacis
2001: No sculpture!
2000: Patrician carrying busts
1999: relief
1998: Trajan’s Column
1997: Pericles & Commodus – contrast between Greek idealism v Roman realism
1996: 2 reliefs
______________________________________________________________________________________
HIGHER
ORDINARY
PRACTISE
PRACTISE
Answer 2000: Topic 10. (iii) in class.
Answer 2005: Topic 10, (ii)
YOU HAVE 25 MINUTES !
HOMEWORK
Allow 25 minutes
Answer 1997: Topic 10: (iii)
Answer 2006. Topic 10. (iii)
DO NOT PLAGERIZE MY NOTES! WRITE YOUR ANSWERS IN YOUR OWN WORDS!!!
ROMAN SCULPTURE, Part 1: Free Standing Portrait Sculpture
Sample Questions and Answers for Roman Free-Standing Sculpture
HIGHER 2005, Topic 10, (iii)
Photograph H on Paper X shows the portrait bust of the Emperor Commodus. Photograph I shows
the Emperor Philip The Arabian. Study these photographs and answer the following questions:
(a) What does Photograph H reveal about the character of Commodus?
(20)
(b) What does Photograph I reveal of the character of Philip?
(15)
(c) In what ways are these portrait-busts typically Roman?
(15)
(a) I think Commdous must have been seriously in love with himself. The bust reminds me of a friend of mine who is totally up
herself. We were at a fancy-dress party and the theme was Fairies. I just went as a generic fairy but she actually dressed up as
Arwen from Lord of the Rings. She went and bought the dress and everything! Now she did look quite nice but seriously went
way over the top for a simple fancy dress. Everyone complimented her but secretly thought she was way too full of herself.
Commodus is the same. It’s one thing to appear as Hercules but must have been quite another to actually as good as say you
are Hercules, which is what he has done here. By the convention of bracketing he has crammed Hercules whole twelve labours
for immortality into two symbols: the Nemean lion’s pelt (Labour 1) and the Golden Apple’s of the Hesperides (Labour 12); the
other 10 labours are implied. That’s the first thing about his character. The second is vanity. The bust is carved from white
marble, which means his skin would have been milky white but the hair and beard was once adorned in gold leaf, so it must
have been quite a contrast. What beautiful skin you have Emperor Commodus and what gorgeous hair, so curly and full bodied
– do you use L’Oreal or Pantenne? Well whatever it is Emperor it works and you’re so worth it, Did this guy spend all is time in
the bathroom? Well no, actually he didn’t. In fact he spent an awful lot of his time in or around the arena. He was into
gladiatorial competitions in a big way and is famous for involving the crowd in his bouts; whether they wanted to or not. There’s
something about the club I don’t like. Unlike everything else in the piece the club looks gruesome and ugly and yet this
beautiful godlike man is holding it. Isn’t he afraid he might catch a splinter in his gorgeous skin? I don’t think so because of the
look in his eye. Wheeler says the artist has captured a hint of his sadism. I agree. He looks far too smug dressed as he is and
holding what he is holding, as if he is aware of his own power; like he knows he has the power to kill. He seems cruel, selfabsorbed and vain – none of which are good traits in a man, let alone an Emperor.
(b) If ever there was a candidate for a makeover, Philip The Arabian is him. His father was rumoured to be an Arabian brigand and
Philip’s complexion seems to back it up. This guy’s skin has seen too much UV rays. He looks a mess. I’d offer to give him a
makeover but I don’t get the feeling he’d want one. He looks like he’s got much more serious matters to think about than
personal vanity. This Emperor isn’t bothered with how he looks. He’s far too busy being an Emperor. He looks worried about
something, concerned maybe or furtively planning; just the kind of activity I’d expect of an Emperor. No fancy dress parties for
this Roman. He’s on the job. But apart from his gravitas: the Latin ideal of seriousness, there is as certain dignity to this beastly
looking man, a nobility of spirit. His eyes are pensive. His face shows the weight of his worries. I feel a little sorry for this
“insignificant ruler” as Wheeler calls him. If I were a Roman, I’d want to help this Emperor and feel assured that he was trying to
help me. He looks like a good leader should look – self-less, focused and with depth of character.
(c) What unites both sculptures is the sense of gravitas. Gravitas
ORIDNARY 2006, Topic 10, (iii)
Photograph H on Paper X shows the portrait bust of the Emperor Commodus and Photogragh I on
Paper X shows a portrait bust of an aged woman.
(a) How does the sculptor show that he is portraying Commodus as the famous hero Hercules?
(15)
(b) What does this bust tell us about the character of Emperor Commodus?
(15)
(c) Describe the woman shown in Photograph I. How is this sculpture typically Roman?
(20)
ROMAN SCULPTURE, Part 1: Free Standing Portrait Sculpture