The imperfect understanding of kopienkritik combined with a wide dispersion of copy variations within the many modern collections of ‘copies’ may be responsible for the misperception of the role that economic factors actually played in Roman copy production. O. Brendel’ 1953 publication, ‘Prolegomena to a Book on Roman Art’, presents Rome as both a ‘political entity’ and a ‘historical period’ in which the art of replication flourished. According to this view, ‘Greek’ art, in essence, refers to a tradition that continued throughout the Roman rise towards total control of the regions encompassing the Mediterranean.
The aesthetics of the patron viewers and how the elements of decorum influenced the appearance of art therefore seems counterproductive …show more content…
Each type of medium used for reproducing copies seemingly has its own set of rules making it possible to guess at the carving methods by the appearance the finished work. This also makes it possible to distinguish techniques used particularly for replication, and more explicitly to those applied to marble. According to recent studies, which tend to incorporate the perspective of the modern carver and restorer, similarities in tool usage and method are recognisable in the modern workshop as well.
Technique and tool selection implemented by the Roman copyist in antiquity is still yet to be fully established however due to discrepancies within the limited literary evidence available on ancient Roman methods. The relics of ancient sculpture permit us to observe these methods at different periods and in different phases so that we can in fact obtain a fairly clear understanding of the essential outlines of process development and practice followed by the ancient sculptor throughout the …show more content…
From these studies, combined with the contributions of practicing carvers and restorers such as Rockwell, Bessac and Pfanner, three main categories of stone carving are distinguishable. It is imperative to keep in mind that these classes are by no means fixed, but within each of these categories, a series of tool types are in fact identifiable and aid in the understanding of basic form and
The aesthetics of the patron viewers and how the elements of decorum influenced the appearance of art therefore seems counterproductive …show more content…
Each type of medium used for reproducing copies seemingly has its own set of rules making it possible to guess at the carving methods by the appearance the finished work. This also makes it possible to distinguish techniques used particularly for replication, and more explicitly to those applied to marble. According to recent studies, which tend to incorporate the perspective of the modern carver and restorer, similarities in tool usage and method are recognisable in the modern workshop as well.
Technique and tool selection implemented by the Roman copyist in antiquity is still yet to be fully established however due to discrepancies within the limited literary evidence available on ancient Roman methods. The relics of ancient sculpture permit us to observe these methods at different periods and in different phases so that we can in fact obtain a fairly clear understanding of the essential outlines of process development and practice followed by the ancient sculptor throughout the …show more content…
From these studies, combined with the contributions of practicing carvers and restorers such as Rockwell, Bessac and Pfanner, three main categories of stone carving are distinguishable. It is imperative to keep in mind that these classes are by no means fixed, but within each of these categories, a series of tool types are in fact identifiable and aid in the understanding of basic form and