Galinsky Augustan Art Review
There is no doubt that the age of Augustus was one of change, and this transformation was felt in all aspects of Roman life. The essays found within Galinsky’s Cambridge Companion to the Age of Augustus regarding art and architecture emphasize the first emperor’s influence. The princeps was able to use artwork and building projects to “Romanize” and, in a sense, “Augustanize” his diverse empire. From portraiture to wall painting, the first emperor was an ever-present force in the lives of his citizens.
After the civil wars, Augustus created a new, united ruling class and portrayed their solidarity to the public in a meaningful and easily understandable way. Diana Kleiner demonstrates how portraiture played a major role in this feat. The new elite, although typically related by marriage only, began to look alike in their statuary. So much so, in fact, that it is difficult to even distinguish one from another. In their “indivisible concord,” the imperial family guaranteed stability for Rome.1 Borrowing from the Greeks, Augustan semblance “eschewed individuality in favor of a communal ideal.”2
This unity was particularly important in the face of the diversity of the fledgling empire. Aspiring to the ideals of the imperial family, freedmen were particularly eager to imitate Augustan semblance as a way of blending in with their Roman peers.3 The funerary reliefs of these individuals, similar to that of Lucius Vibius’ family, mimic the styles found on the emperor’s Ara Pacis.4 Thus, “internationalism became nationalism,” and the diversity of the empire hardened into a concrete, “collective Roman identity.”5
Architecture, too, reflected the transformation of Rome from Republic to Empire. As Diane Favro points out, the Republican capital, “parochial in appearance,” stood in stark contrast to the great cities of the East.6 Attempts at beautifying Rome had been sporadic. However, the first emperor, with the help of the spoils of Egypt, was able to devise a cohesive
After the civil wars, Augustus created a new, united ruling class and portrayed their solidarity to the public in a meaningful and easily understandable way. Diana Kleiner demonstrates how portraiture played a major role in this feat. The new elite, although typically related by marriage only, began to look alike in their statuary. So much so, in fact, that it is difficult to even distinguish one from another. In their “indivisible concord,” the imperial family guaranteed stability for Rome.1 Borrowing from the Greeks, Augustan semblance “eschewed individuality in favor of a communal ideal.”2
This unity was particularly important in the face of the diversity of the fledgling empire. Aspiring to the ideals of the imperial family, freedmen were particularly eager to imitate Augustan semblance as a way of blending in with their Roman peers.3 The funerary reliefs of these individuals, similar to that of Lucius Vibius’ family, mimic the styles found on the emperor’s Ara Pacis.4 Thus, “internationalism became nationalism,” and the diversity of the empire hardened into a concrete, “collective Roman identity.”5
Architecture, too, reflected the transformation of Rome from Republic to Empire. As Diane Favro points out, the Republican capital, “parochial in appearance,” stood in stark contrast to the great cities of the East.6 Attempts at beautifying Rome had been sporadic. However, the first emperor, with the help of the spoils of Egypt, was able to devise a cohesive