Greek sculpture was diversity. Every period had different style. As we can see, they were improved by time to time. In Hellenistic period, they were already developed. Those figures already had movement and emotion. For instance, Statue of a Gaulish Chieftain (Roman copy of a bronze statue from Pergamon, Turkey ca. 230-220 BCE), also called Ludovisi Gaul. According to Boardman, this figure was “thought to be a copy of a bronze original which formed part of a monument set up in Pergamum in the late third century BC to commemorate Attalus I’s victory over the Galatians, Various elements.” (314) It was a figure that presents a man killed his wife first and committing suicide. He also preferred death to surrender. We can see that ancient Greek
…show more content…
It was complexity. One is called Doric order; another is called Ionic order. Each of there had their format and requirement. They were based on different aspect:
“By the end of the seventh century the Doric order emerged in mainland Greece, its intricate but austere patterns based on the timbering of earlier structures. Soon afterwards the east-Greek world contributed the Ionic order, based on orientalizing patterns of flower and scroll.” (Boardman 278)
However, both orders were slower developed. The columns of both orders were rest on the stylobate (a continuous base supporting a row of columns in classical Greek architecture), and the upper course of the platform. These Greek column capitals had two main elements. The lower part of this two orders were different .For Doric order, it was curved. It was slightly same as the Mycenaean capitals. On the order hand, Ionic order was small, and the frieze was thinner. Nonetheless, the upper part of these two orders was same. In addition, Doric metope (a square space between triglyphs in a Doric frieze) panels or Ionic friezes were proved important fields for the display of religious and state propaganda, as had the very differently disposed. (Boardman 279) For instance, the Temple of Hera I (Paestum, Italy, ca. 550 BCE.), it was one of the Doric temple. We can see that detail of the columns was different as Ionic order. It didn’t consist volute and abacus (which is the top part of the
It was complexity. One is called Doric order; another is called Ionic order. Each of there had their format and requirement. They were based on different aspect:
“By the end of the seventh century the Doric order emerged in mainland Greece, its intricate but austere patterns based on the timbering of earlier structures. Soon afterwards the east-Greek world contributed the Ionic order, based on orientalizing patterns of flower and scroll.” (Boardman 278)
However, both orders were slower developed. The columns of both orders were rest on the stylobate (a continuous base supporting a row of columns in classical Greek architecture), and the upper course of the platform. These Greek column capitals had two main elements. The lower part of this two orders were different .For Doric order, it was curved. It was slightly same as the Mycenaean capitals. On the order hand, Ionic order was small, and the frieze was thinner. Nonetheless, the upper part of these two orders was same. In addition, Doric metope (a square space between triglyphs in a Doric frieze) panels or Ionic friezes were proved important fields for the display of religious and state propaganda, as had the very differently disposed. (Boardman 279) For instance, the Temple of Hera I (Paestum, Italy, ca. 550 BCE.), it was one of the Doric temple. We can see that detail of the columns was different as Ionic order. It didn’t consist volute and abacus (which is the top part of the