Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

English (EN)·Polski (PL)·Yкраїнський (UK)
Przejdź do strony domowej biblioteki Centralna Biblioteka Wojskowa Link otwiera się w nowym oknie Logo biblioteki Prolib Integro - strona głównaCentralna Biblioteka Wojskowa

Wyszukujesz frazę "Late Roman art" wg kryterium: Temat

  Lista filtrów
Wyrównaj
    Wyświetlanie 1-2 z 2
    Tytuł:
    Iconography of Zwiebelknopffibeln in the Art of the Late Roman Empire
    Autorzy:
    Tybulewicz, Rozalia
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/484067.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2014
    Wydawca:
    Polska Akademia Nauk. Instytut Kultur Śródziemnomorskich i Orientalnych PAN
    Tematy:
    iconography
    cross-bow fibulae
    elite garments
    attributes of social status
    Late Roman art
    Opis:
    In the Late Antiquity, the so-called cross-bow type fibulae (Germ. Zwiebelknopffibeln), finger-rings, and richly embroidered ceremonial garments (tunica and chlamys) equipped with elaborately decorated belts (baltei, cinguli), in addition to luxurious silver plates (missoria) and ivory consular diptychs constitute an indispensable element of the imperial system of gift-giving, so-called largitio, for the highest-ranking state officials. On account of their importance for the owner, they were very often depicted on pieces of the Late Roman imperial art. The majority of those depictions date from the times of the emperor Diocletian and end in the times of Justinian I (from AD 284 to 565). Cross-bow type fibulae are frequently represented on the Late Antique bas-reliefs, diptychs, mosaics, and missoria. There are a few different categories of the contexts of their occurrence. First of all, they are closely connected with the presentation of the emperor in power, portrayed alone (the Arch of Galerius, Thessaloniki), or together with his state officials, while watching chariot races in the Hippodrome and receiving the tribute of envoys representing conquered Barbarians tribes (the ‘Obelisk of Theodosius I’, Istanbul). Brooches also constitute a characteristic element of the garments of the highest-ranking officials accompanying the imperial couple in sacrificial processions with gifts for Christian churches (the Basilica of San Vitale, Ravenna). Additionally, they are shown in depictions of already or newly appointed highest-ranking dignitaries during public governance, but also of future pretenders to the highest ranks of Imperium Romanum military and civilian administration. Moreover, they appear as the main decorative element of garments of Christian Catholic church martyrs, e.g. Saint Onesiphorus (Thessaloniki), Saint Vitalis (Ravenna) and Saint Theodorus (Rome), who primarily were Roman citizens and soldiers, and died because of professing Christianity. Cross-bow fibulae constituted a characteristic measure of distinction amid the elite of the Late Roman Empire. They functioned also as indispensable attribute of the ceremonial garment of the emperor and state officials subjected to him. In the literature, throughout all of the iconographic material, only fibulae of types 3/4, 5, 5 or 6, 6, 6 or 7 and 7, according to P.M. Pröttel’s typology, are to be found.
    Źródło:
    Études et Travaux (Institut des Cultures Méditerranéennes et Orientales de l’Académie Polonaise des Sciences); 2014, 27; 441-458
    2084-6762
    2449-9579
    Pojawia się w:
    Études et Travaux (Institut des Cultures Méditerranéennes et Orientales de l’Académie Polonaise des Sciences)
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
    Tytuł:
    Kasna antika: dekadencija ili „demokratizacija“ kulture?
    Late Antiquity: Decadence or “Democratization” of Culture?
    Autorzy:
    Milinović, Dino
    Powiązania:
    https://bibliotekanauki.pl/articles/636214.pdf
    Data publikacji:
    2019
    Wydawca:
    Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
    Tematy:
    Roman Empire
    Late Antiquity
    Roman art
    democratization of culture
    decadence
    Opis:
    In our age “without the emperor”, fascination with empires and with the emperor mystique continues. Take for witness Tolkien and his Return of the King, the third sequel of The Lord of the Rings, or the television serial Game of Thrones. In the background, of course, is the lingering memory of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire, “a revolution which is still felt by all nations of the world”, to quote Edward Gibbon. It comes as a surprise that in this dramatic moment of its history, in times marked by political, economic and spiritual crisis that shook the very foundations of the Empire during the 3rd century, historians and art historians have recognized the revival of plebeian culture (arte plebea, kleinbürgerliche Kultur). It was the Italian historian Santo Mazzarino, talking at the XI International Congress of the Historical Sciences in Stockholm in 1960, who introduced a new paradigm: the “democratization of culture”. In the light of the historical process in the late Roman Empire, when growing autocracy, bureaucracy, militarization and social tensions leave no doubt as to the real political character of the government, the new paradigm opened up fresh approaches to the phenomenon of decadence and decline of the Roman world. As such, it stands against traditional scenario of the “triumph of barbarism and Christianity”, which was made responsible for the fall of the Roman Empire and the eclipse of the classical civilization of ancient Greece and Rome. It is not by accident that the new paradigm appeared around the middle of the 20th century, at the time when European society itself underwent a kind of “democratization of culture”, faced with the phenomenon of mass culture and the need to find new ways of evaluating popular art. Today, more than anything else, the notion of “democratization of culture” in late Roman Empire forces us to acknowledge a disturbing correspondence between autocratic and populist forms of government. It may come as a shock to learn that the very emperors who went down in Roman history as villains and culprits (such as Caligula, Nero or Commodus), were sometimes considered the most “democratic” among Roman rulers. Do we need to feel certain unease at this historical parallel?
    Źródło:
    Poznańskie Studia Slawistyczne; 2019, 17; 145-158
    2084-3011
    Pojawia się w:
    Poznańskie Studia Slawistyczne
    Dostawca treści:
    Biblioteka Nauki
    Artykuł
      Wyświetlanie 1-2 z 2

      Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies