Log in or Sign up
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
What did emperors think of their portraits on coins?
>
Reply to Thread
Message:
<p>[QUOTE="lehmansterms, post: 2555630, member: 80804"]There are a number of factors you may need to keep in mind when visiting the subject of Imperial portraits. First, the sort of perfect copying we take for granted virtually didn't exist, except for small, insignificant items like lamps or tiny, cheap plaster or terra cotta busts of popular people, gods or personifications sold in stalls at the market for display at home which were cast in molds - even those were painted by hand so there would have been some variation even there. </p><p>As for the coins, although they strove for some sort of "verite", they were the product of many different artists with differing levels of skill and talent - as well as having varying degrees of access to the best portraits and varying degrees of Imperial input or impediment.</p><p>Also the emperor was only occasionally in a situation to "sit to a sculptor", even if not out on some border fighting some interminable war, at least the more conscientious of them had a pretty full schedule as the ruler of an enormous empire. </p><p>So, when the emperor was at his leisure to sit for a top sculptor of the sort who would be retained for the Imperial court, he probably had a LOT of input into the portrait that resulted - possibly positive - possibly meddling. We know some folks are a lot more concerned with their looks and how they're seen than others, so there was at least a chance that the portraiture of the more devoted emperors was probably as close as artistic skill could render.</p><p>The original skilled and talented sculptor could only create so many copies of the same work, the vast majority of busts and coin portraits were then, copies of copies (of copies...etc.)</p><p>Obviously the creators of dies for Provincial coins did not have the same expectations of realism or level of skill - one wonders how many steps removed from a "realistic" portrait the prototypes from which many of them may have been working actually may have been.</p><p>The point is that there were a lot of factors which might have affected how accurate the portraits were, from technical limitations, to artistic talent and Imperial interest/interference. It's probably a good idea to try to blend all those varying portraits in your mind when envisioning what the emperors really looked like.[/QUOTE]</p><p><br /></p>
[QUOTE="lehmansterms, post: 2555630, member: 80804"]There are a number of factors you may need to keep in mind when visiting the subject of Imperial portraits. First, the sort of perfect copying we take for granted virtually didn't exist, except for small, insignificant items like lamps or tiny, cheap plaster or terra cotta busts of popular people, gods or personifications sold in stalls at the market for display at home which were cast in molds - even those were painted by hand so there would have been some variation even there. As for the coins, although they strove for some sort of "verite", they were the product of many different artists with differing levels of skill and talent - as well as having varying degrees of access to the best portraits and varying degrees of Imperial input or impediment. Also the emperor was only occasionally in a situation to "sit to a sculptor", even if not out on some border fighting some interminable war, at least the more conscientious of them had a pretty full schedule as the ruler of an enormous empire. So, when the emperor was at his leisure to sit for a top sculptor of the sort who would be retained for the Imperial court, he probably had a LOT of input into the portrait that resulted - possibly positive - possibly meddling. We know some folks are a lot more concerned with their looks and how they're seen than others, so there was at least a chance that the portraiture of the more devoted emperors was probably as close as artistic skill could render. The original skilled and talented sculptor could only create so many copies of the same work, the vast majority of busts and coin portraits were then, copies of copies (of copies...etc.) Obviously the creators of dies for Provincial coins did not have the same expectations of realism or level of skill - one wonders how many steps removed from a "realistic" portrait the prototypes from which many of them may have been working actually may have been. The point is that there were a lot of factors which might have affected how accurate the portraits were, from technical limitations, to artistic talent and Imperial interest/interference. It's probably a good idea to try to blend all those varying portraits in your mind when envisioning what the emperors really looked like.[/QUOTE]
Your name or email address:
Do you already have an account?
No, create an account now.
Yes, my password is:
Forgot your password?
Stay logged in
Coin Talk
Home
Forums
>
Coin Forums
>
Ancient Coins
>
What did emperors think of their portraits on coins?
>
Home
Home
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Activity
Recent Posts
Forums
Forums
Quick Links
Search Forums
Recent Posts
Competitions
Competitions
Quick Links
Competition Index
Rules, Terms & Conditions
Gallery
Gallery
Quick Links
Search Media
New Media
Showcase
Showcase
Quick Links
Search Items
Most Active Members
New Items
Directory
Directory
Quick Links
Directory Home
New Listings
Members
Members
Quick Links
Notable Members
Current Visitors
Recent Activity
New Profile Posts
Sponsors
Menu
Search
Search titles only
Posted by Member:
Separate names with a comma.
Newer Than:
Search this thread only
Search this forum only
Display results as threads
Useful Searches
Recent Posts
More...