Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.579494
Title: The aesthetics of empire in Athens and Persia
Author: Downes, S. E.
Awarding Body: University College London (University of London)
Current Institution: University College London (University of London)
Date of Award: 2011
Availability of Full Text:
Access through EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please try the link below.
Access through Institution:
Abstract:
This thesis is a comparative study of Persepolis and the Akropolis as monumental centres of empire. It considers the relationship between style and politics on the two sites, specifically, the extent to which stylistic variations can be explained by their capacity to promote different political effects. Starting from Gell’s proposition that ‘art is a system of action intended to change the world, rather than encode symbolic propositions about it,’ it examines the precise mechanisms, in particular the eliciting of cognitive or behavourial responses, by which the architecture and sculpture of the two sites have social consequences. It seeks to demonstrate a relationship between variations in the material traits of the sites and the political systems of the two states, defined both in terms of the autocratic/democratic distinction, but also the different structures of the two empires. The comparison of the two sites gives greater analytical security to the interpretation: they function as controls for each other. Each of the five chapters considers a different material aspect of the sites. The first chapter considers the spatial layout of the two sites; the second considers the function of the architectural sculpture of the two sites as decorative art; the third examines the sculpture as human images; the fourth considers the relationship between the iconography of the reliefs and the practice on the sites; the fifth looks at the construction of memory and time. In conclusion, common themes running through the chapters, such as control and legibility, are noted, and the extent to which they form a deliberate political programme is discussed.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.579494  DOI: Not available
Share: