Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Egypt in Italy: Visions of Egypt in Roman Imperial Culture

Egypt in Italy: Visions of Egypt in Roman Imperial Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 249 pp. Roman senators who were sent out to govern conquered provinces made a habit of enriching themselves by looting the local landscape. The province of Egypt was no exception, but the looters were the emperors themselves. They looted now not in order to adorn private quarters but to place symbols of their power in the public structures of Rome itself. Swetnam-­ urland provides fascinating insights into how objects like obelisks were transported and erected and how Romans might have come to regard them not as bizarre objects of conquest but as routine features of the cityscape. Egyptian artifacts attracted the private sector as well. She analyzes the repurposing of imported objects as well as the market for goods in the Egyptian style manufactured in Italy, the appetite for which was often whetted by Romans who traveled to Egypt. In a study on this topic, we expect —f to find discussion of the extravagant   or example, the small pyramid, which survives today, that Cestius had built for his own tomb. More surprising is the great variety of small objects and the uses to which they were put: an alabaster vessel reused as a cinerary urn, or the integration of Egyptian images such as serpents and baboons into otherwise standard Roman art, or the various ways in which Egyptian religious symbols and concepts are deployed in Roman letters. Horace famously remarked about the Hellenizing trends in Roman art forms that “captive Greece captured Rome,” but Greek and Roman art partook of similar representational realism. Egyptian objects did not, yet they too succeeded in capturing the Roman imagination. —  usan Stephens doi 10.1215/0961754X-3988247 Common Knowledge 23:3 © 2017 by Duke University Press Published by Duke University Press http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Common Knowledge Duke University Press

Egypt in Italy: Visions of Egypt in Roman Imperial Culture

Common Knowledge , Volume 23 (3) – Sep 1, 2017

Loading next page...
 
/lp/duke-university-press/egypt-in-italy-visions-of-egypt-in-roman-imperial-culture-3VMQU0QPnA

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Duke University Press
Copyright
Copyright � Duke Univ Press
ISSN
0961-754X
eISSN
1538-4578
DOI
10.1215/0961754X-3988247
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 249 pp. Roman senators who were sent out to govern conquered provinces made a habit of enriching themselves by looting the local landscape. The province of Egypt was no exception, but the looters were the emperors themselves. They looted now not in order to adorn private quarters but to place symbols of their power in the public structures of Rome itself. Swetnam-­ urland provides fascinating insights into how objects like obelisks were transported and erected and how Romans might have come to regard them not as bizarre objects of conquest but as routine features of the cityscape. Egyptian artifacts attracted the private sector as well. She analyzes the repurposing of imported objects as well as the market for goods in the Egyptian style manufactured in Italy, the appetite for which was often whetted by Romans who traveled to Egypt. In a study on this topic, we expect —f to find discussion of the extravagant   or example, the small pyramid, which survives today, that Cestius had built for his own tomb. More surprising is the great variety of small objects and the uses to which they were put: an alabaster vessel reused as a cinerary urn, or the integration of Egyptian images such as serpents and baboons into otherwise standard Roman art, or the various ways in which Egyptian religious symbols and concepts are deployed in Roman letters. Horace famously remarked about the Hellenizing trends in Roman art forms that “captive Greece captured Rome,” but Greek and Roman art partook of similar representational realism. Egyptian objects did not, yet they too succeeded in capturing the Roman imagination. —  usan Stephens doi 10.1215/0961754X-3988247 Common Knowledge 23:3 © 2017 by Duke University Press Published by Duke University Press

Journal

Common KnowledgeDuke University Press

Published: Sep 1, 2017

There are no references for this article.