The term “Constantinian” is used to describe official manifestations of the arts during the final three-quarters of the fourth century. The finest architectural developments and public projects intended for propaganda purposes were primarily urban in character. Towns underwent a gradual transformation, and although the forum continued to be the focus of urban life, pagan temples were slowly replaced by Christian buildings. Not all public buildings were intended for Christian purposes, however. In Rome, the great civic basilica begun by Maxentius and completed by Constantine epitomizes the new official architecture of Late Antiquity. Built on a rise, it consisted of a nave and lateral aisles of monumental proportions. The imposing central nave (250 x 80 feet, and ii s feet high) was roofed with a groin vault resting on eight columns of Proconnessian marble. The influence of this building on the great Christian basilicas has often been noted.

In the monumental apse at the west end of the building was erected a colossal statue of Constantine, of which only the head (8’/2 feet high), a hand, an arm and a few other fragments have survived. The statue might serve to represent the entire era. It depicted the Emperor seated on a throne, wearing the paludamentum, his raised right hand holding a sceptre, which (if Eusebius is to be believed) was topped by a cross. The Christian Emperor had been elevated to almost supernatural status, dominating mere mortals by the sheer size of his image. The statue also defined the stylistic features of Constantinian portrait use: a renewed Classicism of rigorous stamp, which was to influence many private portraits, particularly those carved on sarcophagi.

The vestiges of other major buildings mm the brief reign of Maxentius can still be seen in Rome, notably the original circular temple dedicated to the deified Romulus in the Forum and his own palace on the Via Appia. Palace architecture is particularly well illustrated by Diocletian’s palace at Split. Although it antedates the Constantinian period proper, this palace is representative of a form of residential architecture in which monumental and decorative sculpture were important elements. Built around the year 300 on the Dalmatian coast near Salonae, the complex was intended as a retreat for the Emperor when he abdicated, five years later. It is based on the rectangular plan of a castrum, with towers at the corners and flanking the gateways, and a great peristyle dominating the residential apartments overlooking the sea. The palace at Split is generally conservative in design, blending the forms of a military camp with borrowings from the great imperial palaces of Rome. Other sumptuous palaces of this kind are known to have been built at Antioch, Constantinople, and for also semi—private use at Piazza Armerina in Sicily.

The official sculpture of the Tetrarchic period finds typical expression in the Tetrarchs Group from Constantinople, carved in red porphyry in the early fourth century and now incorporated into the south-facing façade of St Mark’s, Venice. In Thessalonica, the imperial capital of Galerius, a whole new residential quarter was built around the Emperor’s palace and the circus. At the head of the street leading to the Tetrarch’s circular mausoleum was erected a triumphal arch, its supporting pillars decorated with historiated scenes. Two of these pillars, depicting Galerius’s military campaigns in 297, have survived. Four horizontal registers separated by striking decorative bands are carved, on the north—east, with battle scenes and, on the south—west, with more scenes of the same type alternating with historical and allegorical imagery. At one point in the story, Galerius and Diocletian are shown performing sacrifice at the start of the second stage of the war. The final reliefs mark the end of the campaign, culminating in Galerius’s adventus and triumph in 303 AD. Strongly influenced by the Hellenism of the Eastern Mediterranean, the Arch of Galersus bears witness to the eclipse of Rome by the new imperial capital cities in the early fourth century, and the emergence of new forms of abstract and symbolic thought.

To celebrate Constantine’s victory over Maxentius in 312, on the occasion of his decennalia in 355 the Roman Senate and people had a triumphal arch erected at the foot of the Palatine. It consisted of a triple gateway with freestanding columns, a model that had been used several times before. The Arch of Constantine is the repository not only of an important group of reliefs from the first quarter of the fourth century, but also of many older works: eight statues of Dacians from Trajan’s reign, which stand atop the columns, eight medallions from Hadrian’s time, eight reliefs from the reign of Marcus Aurelius, and the great upper frieze from Trajan’s era. Contemporary with the construction of the Arch itself are the circular reliefs representing the sun and moon on the east and west ends, the eight imperial busts of the smaller openings, the reliefs of victories and trophies carved on the plinths of the columns, the divinities carved on the keystones of the arches, the river gods of the side arches, and the victories and seasons of the central area. Most important of all is the historical frieze which, following a pattern set by the arches of Titus and Septimius Severus in Rome and that of Trajan at Benevento, runs above the side arches and continues at mid-height around the ends of the monument. This frieze is rightly considered to represent the ideology and style of the period.

Symptomatic of the formal canon of Late Antiquity (which tended to distort the Classical ideal) is the complete absence of elements derived from the Hellenistic tradition. There is also a certain irregularity in the composition and a lack of realism in the way the figures are arranged. The atmosphere of the imperial court is expressed in new iconographical renderings, with the Emperor depicted full-face in the centre, flanked by figures who seem to exist only in relation to his person. The Emperor’s new status as a Christian prince, also reflected in consular diptychs of the period, is here combined with an obvious intention to lay claim to the Roman imperial heritage by the redeployment of earlier sculptural reliefs.

A certain unity of style is to be found throughout the Mediterranean region, in official monuments of the kind we have been describing, in the decoration of such luxurious private residences as those at Piazza Armerina in Sicily or Centcelles near Tarragona, and in the portraits of those who feature in the iconography of Christian basilicas (Aquileia). During the first half of the fourth century, even on sarcophagi, there is a tendency towards portraits with bulging eyes, roundish heads and short hair, Later on, and even during the first half of the fifth century, this style is abandoned in favour of a rather flaccid form of Classicism. A good example is the statue of the last pagan emperor, Julian the Apostate, now in the Louvre.

Nowadays, we tend to use the term Late Antiquity to describe the final period of the Roman Empire and the changes associated with it. Although the final centuries, from the reign of the Severans until the ultimate fall of the Western Empire in the fifth century, are traditionally seen as a time of progressive decadence, the restructuring undertaken by Diocletian (284—305), and then by Constantine (307—337), signalled a clean break with the period of invasions that had characterized the second half of the third century. Their reigns saw a decisive centralization of power as well as the development of an imperial court, not only in Rome but also in Trier, Milan, Sirmium, Constantinople and even Ravenna. Constantine brought the Tetrarchic period to an end by making Christianity the official religion of the Empire. Ecclesiastical institutions very soon came to play an important role in urban life, as the episcopal form of church government became established. The Church sought to promote its image and Christianize the arts, including public and private monumental sculpture.

Under the Severans, from Septimius Severus (193—212) to Alexander Severus (222—235), Rome continued to play a central role in the cultural policy of the emperors. Major monuments were built. Foreign works of art, mainly of Asian origin, continued to be imported, and artists flocked to the city, particularly from Hellenistic centres. There was a notable import trade in sculpted marble sarcophagi. A wreck from the first half of the third century, found off Taranto, was carrying a cargo of twenty-four such items from the Eastern Mediterranean. The carvings on sarcophagi were imbued with a new spirituality, combining symbolism, mythology and oriental religion, and thus preparing the way for Christian themes. In the private iconography of sarcophagi, we now find the same relationship as had previously existed between the public figure and his portrait in official sculpture, with the deceased often represented taking part in hunting or battle scenes. The entire third century is rich in fine sarcophagi. The Ludovisi sarcophagus, for instance, at the Museo delle Terme, which dates from the early part of the century, features a true likeness of the deceased in the guise of a victorious warrior. At the same time, there was a vogue for pastoral or bucolic scenes covering all sides of the sarcophagus, which was another step on the road to Christian iconography.

Two outstanding works of public sculpture survive from the Severan period. The first, the gateway known as the Silversmiths’ Arch, was erected in 204 AD at the entrance to the Forum Boarium, the former business centre of Republican Rome. The monument in many ways anticipates Late Antique sculpture: the emperor and empress, who occupy almost all the available space, are depicted frontally, without depth, while foliage elements play an important part in the decoration. The chief monument of this period is, nevertheless, the Arch of Septimius Sevens, erected in the Roman Forum in 203 AD. It consists of three openings framed by free—standing columns on imposing bases, and an uninterrupted upper storey bearing the inscription. The four large historical reliefs above the lateral arches tell of Septimius Severus’s campaigns in Mesopotamia. These panels continue the Roman tradition of historical relief sculpture. According to Herodian, the military scenes were, inspired by paintings the Emperor sent to the Senate. Stylistically, they exhibit definite links with the reliefs of the columns of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius, particularly the latter. However, the carved subjects are more isolated, in keeping with the general trend of official sculpture in the first quarter of the third century. Public relief sculpture and private sarcophagi were now developing on parallel lines and drawing on similar subject matter. The Palazzo Mattei sarcophagus, carved with hunting scenes, shows the direction things were taking in the second quarter of the century. It is sarcophagi of this type that enable us to follow the various stylistic trends of the period. In imperial portraits, too, we can chart a gradual liberation from Classical canons and at the same time the emergence of a new physical and psychological individualism.

During the third century, the provinces began to evolve sculptural forms of their own. Independence was in the air, encouraging the development of local styles, which were eventually to influence the art of Rome itself The materials and techniques used by local craftsmen were an important factor in the process of differentiation. From the time of Gallienus (253—268) until the Tetrarchy, Roman art abandoned the Hellenistic tradition and forms evolved in a new climate of artistic freedom. Not until the rime of Constantine did the Empire rediscover its unity this time under the influence of Christianity.

THE AUGUSTAN MYTH

The emperors imposed new organs of government and a centralized administration, with themselves as head of the army and Pontifex Maximus. On the accession of Augustus (27 BC—14 AD), a new sense of optimism swept away the nightmare of the civil wars. Augustus announced his determination to re-establish Roman order

and encouraged literature and the arts. The result of this new centralizing force was an impressive unity of form. There was a clear intention to assimilate the myths of Rome’s origins in such works of art as the Ara Pacis or Virgil’s epic poem, the Aeneid, which presents the exploits of its Trojan hero as prefiguring those of Augustus himself. In architecture, Augustus transformed the city of Rome, making extensive use of marble and surpassing the achievements of Julius Caesar by building his own forum exalt the gens lulia.

The statue of Augustus wearing a cuirass, from Livia’s suburban villa at Prima Porta on the Via Flaminia (Vatican), shows the Emperor in short military dress, paludamentum over his left arm and lance in hand. His right hand makes an energetic gesture as he calls for silence. In carving the figure, the sculptor clearly drew inspiration from famous models such as the Doryphorus of Polyclitus. This portrait epitomizes the new idealizing tendency characteristic of Augustan Classicism.

The Prima Porta statue is particularly noteworthy for the decorative reliefs on the Emperor’s cuirass. The composition is dominated by a personification of the sky, which hovers over the chariot of the Sun god as he follows the figures of Aurora and Phosphorus. Tellus, god of the Earth, accompanied by two putti and flanked by Apollo riding a griffin and Diana on a hind, occupies the lower part of the cuirass. The middle register is taken up by a highly symbolic scene which defines not only the ideology of Empire but the entire propaganda effort of Augustus’s reign. The king of the Parthians, Phraates IV, is shown restoring the standards lost by Crassus. He hands them to a Roman general, probably Tiberius, who pacified Germany and Pannonia in the years 12—8 BC. This gives us the clue to the date of the statue or its model. The statue therefore emphasizes Augustus’s support for Tiberius and exemplifies an emerging Neo-Classical style with an admixture of Neo—Atticism, evident in the reliefs of the cuirass.

The greatest, though not earliest, work of the Augustan age is the Ara Pacis, an altar dedicated to the Pax Augusta. This monument best sums up the prevailing sense of the sacred and the universal power at the heart of the imperial idea. On the fourth of July of the year 13 BC, the Roman Senate voted for the erection of an altar devoted to the Pax Augusta, on the Campus Martins, to celebrate Augustus’s return from Gaul and the Iberian peninsula. It took four years to complete. Fragments of the monument were discovered over a long period between the sixteenth century and excavations carried out in 1903 and 1937—38. The work has since been reconstructed from the recovered fragments, with aid from other figurative sources, particularly coins, though not on the original site. The Ara Pacis is rectangular in plan, with two wide doorways on the shorter sides. The altar proper is at the centre of the monument, which stands on a podium and was decorated, inside and out, with monumental reliefs separated by pilasters carved with candelabra of foliage. On the outside, the decoration is arranged in two horizontal bands, the lower adorned with foliage and acanthus motifs, the upper done in figurative relief The four panels flanking the doors are sculpted with mythical and allegorical scenes, while the longer sides feature two processions. The smaller panels display a general form of symbolism, in which peace leads to the prosperity of Rome. The processional scenes make a close association between the official aspects of religion, with its priests, and imperial power as mediated by the family o( Augustus. The procession is led by Agrippa, the principal heir of the dynastic line, who died in 52 BC. Identification of the members of Augustus’s household has raised a great deal of controversy over the years. At times, the extremely formal processions have been interpreted in very realistic and objective ways; at others, they have been viewed as idealistic presentations of the dynasty and the problems surrounding the succession.

The Ara Pacis is a monument which, in the style of its figured reliefs and the decorative power of its friezes, exemplifies the long-awaited independence of Roman art from Greek models. The Classicism of this period is marked by a predilection for marble and by innovations in form: relief sculpture itself, perspective, a sense of space and depth, and the detailed treatment of clothing. The impressive unity of inspiration and technique one feels in these works reflects an aristocratic approach to art, at the service of political power. In the Ara Pacis, we discern an emerging taste for the Neo—Attic style, which the Roman elites favoured to the point of making it an essential feature of official art. The spiritual and political tranquillity of this period of peace, replacing the anguish and dangers of earlier times, is evidenced by an eschewing of eclecticism and the choice of a new style pregnant with the Greek spirit. It marks one of the high points of Roman art. It is hardly surprising that historians of Neo—Classical art have given special emphasis to this period, although they have not always noticed its specifically Neo—Attic components. Its novel elements include the juxtaposition of figured and purely decorative friezes — a practice the Greeks would never have consented to — and the difference in style between the processional scenes and the smaller panels. This lack of organic and structural links, unheard of in the Greek world, betrays the Italo-Etruscan background against which the new style developed, drawing its inspiration from the artistic traditions of the Hellenistic kingdoms and from that of consular and Republican Rome.

Closely related to these two monuments is another altar, the Ara Pietatis, voted by the Senate in 22 AD, but not dedicated until AD, by the Emperor Claudius. So close is the resemblance between these and the earlier reliefs, there is on doubt that the Augustan style outlived the Emperor himself. But official ideology did gradually change, as is evident if we compare the unreal, almost timeless, quality of the reliefs for Augustus’s altar with the very precise topographical indications of the Ara Pietatis, which harks back to an older tradition of triumphal painting. Neo-Atticism gradually gave way to the Neo-Hellenism that was to represent the hallmark of the first century. It is epitomized by the desire to imitate the works of the great Hellenistic courts in small artefacts of monumental conception, such as, for instance, the Gemma Augustea (Vienna) or the Grand Camée de France (Bibliotheque Nationale, Paris).

The city of Rome, whose name is first recorded in the late fourth century on the Ficoroni Cut (in the Villa Giulia), was soon graced with important monuments, such as the Regia, a mid-sixth-century religious building which stood in the Forum, and numerous temples such as those in the Area Sacra beside the Largo Argentina. The basilica gradually developed as a rectangular building with a number of side aisles. The later Republican period saw the erection of the temples in the Forum Holitorium, urban development of the southern areas of the Campus Martius, and the building of the Tabularium on the Capitoline.

The new social classes which emerged during the final prosperous stage of the Republic commissioned sculptors to work on various projects. The most characteristic monument of this new trend, possibly the first public relief sculpture, is the altar of Domitius Ahenobarbus, fragments of which are preserved in the Munich and Louvre museums. The reliefs graced the base of a temple to Mars or Neptune in the Circus Flaminius, where the church of San Salvatore in Campo now stands. There were also statues, since lost, of Neptune, Amphitrite, Achilles and Nereids, which, according to Pliny, were made by one Skopas (not to be confused with the renowned sculptor of that name from Paros). Three sides are decorated with a marine procession celebrating the marriage of Neptune and Amphitrite, depicted in a chariot drawn by tritons. The fourth side shows animals being presented, in a scene which is certainly sacrificial in character, and yet contains elements of something quite different. Beside the altar stand the god Mars and the Censor with his assistants. This relief, which also owes something to a military environment, inaugurates a new type of composition centred on the censor. Though they all date from around 110 BC, the reliefs differ in style. The marine procession derives from a Hellenistic and Neo—Attic tradition, and is symbolic rather than realistic in content. The sacrificial scene is considered to be ,the starting point of Roman relief sculpture as we know it.

The use of commemorative reliefs spread rapidly during the first century AD. Examples are the frieze of the Arch of Augustus at Susa (Piedmont) and, in Rome, the base of the altar of the Vicomagistri, erected under Tiberius. Funerary reliefs, of the plebeian or popular kind described earlier, also became very popular in many Italian cities. Some tombs were commissioned by merchants or craftsmen who had grown wealthy, and they tended to embellish their last resting place in monumental fashion. Such tombs are often decorated with scenes from their working life or with funerary banquets.

The culmination of all these developments is to be seen in the frieze depicting preparations for a triumphal procession from the Temple of Apollo Sosianus (Palazzo dei Conservatori). It is based on the triumph celebrated by Sosius in 34 BC, though it was not actually sculpted until twenty or so years later. This relief, like the procession from an altar base which was discovered beneath the Cancelleria building (Vatican Museum), leads on to the mature Roman narrative style which found its fullest official expression on the lateral walls of Augustus’s Ara Pacis.

The attempt to fix a given moment in the life of an individual or group, in functions both public and private, is also evident in Republican portraiture. There is a clean break with the standardized portraits of Etruscan and Italic origin. The supposed portrait of Sulla (Venice) epitomizes the new trend in politically—motivated patrician portraiture, which was to become an essential instrument of propaganda under the new senatorial aristocracy.