Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More from AOL Travel:
Airline tickets,
Hotel reservations,
Rental cars,
Vacation packages,
Discount cruises,
Travel deals
Travel Guides:
New York City,
San Francisco,
Las Vegas,
Boston,
Chicago,
Washington, DC,
London,
Venice,
Beijing,
Dubai,
Rio de Janeiro,
Bangkok,
Costa Rica
Travel Ideas:
Adventure,
Asia Travel,
Beaches,
Cruises,
Europe Travel,
Foodie Travel,
Healthy Travel,
Holiday Travel,
International Destinations,
National Parks,
Skiing,
Travel Blogs,
Travel Tips,
Travel Photography,
US Destinations,
Weekend Getaways
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | Advertise With Us | About Our Ads
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-25-2011 @ 3:07PM
taaruoort said...
You may to search the portrait of Paquio Proculo and his wife; Pompei, 60-70 b.C. in which you can find an exemple of precursor of the portraits that you've presented here.
In all your sources and remandments, you've did'nt yet say why the roman origin of your portraits (how I've explained) it's so unacceptable.
I've read your themes, and I've not found nothing that is'nt suggestions and romantics visions. And none really analysis.
Say that: " In the cosmopolitan world of the eastern Mediterranean, with its constant interaction between cultures, it's hard to say anything is "purely" from one civilization." are suggestive but incorrect and seems an abandonment to analysis: it's hard but not impossible. Those "purities" can be inferred; sometimes it's not easy, but in "our" case is even immediate. When I've sow the images, immediately I've sow the typical (and mature) roman portrait, then I've identified the paintings presents into my "old" text of roman-provincial art. In tribute to your love for sources I report a source: "Roma, la fine dell'arte antica". Translation: "Rome, the end of ancient art"; R. Bianchi Bandinelli; ed. BUR Rizzoli CDS Milano 1988.
The intellectual conversation is not possible, sure, because your dogma cannot fall without reveal your superficiality. You speak about science, without a least of science or logic. Ok, now I may to leave you to your dogmas and to your ignorance; I mean that art and history are not bread for your teeth.
Reply