Greek Sculpture Analysis

When looking at classical Greek sculpture it is important to remembered that replicas created by the Romans are at many times are only way of seeing their beauty even if they are slightly different. According to Marvin in Copying in Roman Sculpture: The Replica Series images of “major and minor gods, athletes, personifications, and cultural heroes are reproduced century after century” throughout Rome and the Mediterranean. (Marvin, 1989) Greek sculpture was “Pillaged during the plunders of cities such as Corinth 146 BC) or Athens (86 BC),” they were “lost at sea.” (Balty, 1998) According to Balty the pieces that weren’t lose during the conquest where not all copied and somewhere destroyed. As a result, it is hard to compare the originals to …show more content…
Mengs attempts to distinguish between Greek and Greco-Roman art by looking at the “style and on quality of execution” and “historical distinctions.” (Potts, 1980) A time range is identified by Mengs stating that Greco-Roman art was on the decline from the time of “Pericles to the time of Alexander the Great,” because artists where replicating but where independent at time from the original source material for the sculptures. Mengs’s goes on to state that “classical masterpieces of Greece” where made to the highest level of refinement possible, but there is a chance that this could be wrong according to Potts who says “Scholars had debated whether the lost masterpieces described in ancient literature were superior to the sculptures which had survived.” (Potts, 1980) Mengs goes on to describe that there are only five pieces of known arts from the time period that match his definition of true Greek Art. The five pieces are the “Apollo Belvedere, the Laocoon, the Belvedere Torso, the Borghese Warrior and the Farnese Hercules.” (Potts, 1980) Eventually Megs decided that only four art pieces represented his ideal and gives a reasoning. The Belvedere Torso and Laocoon are seen as “perfectly beautiful, displaying ‘the taste for beauty’” to explain further the structure of the sculpts as a whole had details and refinement in all aspects of …show more content…
Tullius Cicero actively sought Greco-Roman sculptures to fill his villa by asking his friend T. Pomponius Atticus to find sculptures that suited his likes. In the first letter we see a vague idea of what he wants and that is a place “where Cicero can rest from all troubles and toils.” (Marvin, 1989) In the second letter Cicero become more specific and states he wants sculptures that match a “gymnasiode or appropriate for a gymnasium,” but it does not mean a place of athleticism or training but rather a place of knowledge in philosophy. In his villa he had multiple gymnasiums and gardens but Cicero named one of them “the Academy after the two gymnasia in Athens, where, respectively, Aristotle and Plato had taught.” (Marvin, 1989) In the fourth letter we see that Atticus has bought some sculptures for Cicero and he then encourages him to buy more because the “megarin statues” are expensive but he wants sculptures that mimic the gymnasium feel even if they are poor copies. (Marvin, 1989) By the seventh letter Cicero receives a “Minerva (Athena) herm” which is only well received because it reminds him of his time at the Academy of Athens and the statue becomes central to his villas “the whole gymnasium appears like a votive offering to her.” (Marvin, 1989) Looking at a buyer of Greco-Roman sculpture such as Cicero where mainly focused on who would be entering and staying at