Week #8 Commodus and Caracalla

Post #7 Roman and Early Christian Art

The beautiful marble sculpture of Commodus as Hercules depicts him as the reincarnation of Hercules.  He is dressed in the skin of the Nemean lion and holds his club and the golden apples from the Garden of the Hesperides.  He also is playing up his resemblance to his father Marcus Aurelius who was a great leader but who must have allowed his fondness for his son to override his reason when it came time to name his successor.  The message of propaganda for this sculpture is that this ruler is descended from a god and the son of a king; therefore he has a right to rule.  Commodus looks to the glorious past to affirm his right to rule like a conservative politician who is trying to bring back the good old days.  Much of the audience intended for this work may have been in favor of bringing back good times, which included the luxury of decadence.  The intended propaganda of the work misses the mark because of its contradictions.  He’s bearded though youthful.  He has a strong body type but is very pretty. He holds a club but looks half asleep.   It’s as if this bust is telling us that he is a leader who likes to get his hair done and pose for portraits.

Caracalla, on the other hand, has an exaggerated, intolerant look.  His facial expression is intense and frowning.  From his severe military haircut, which fits easily under a war helmet, to the frown lines and furrows in his brow he shows a strength that rests solely within his own self.  The propagandistic implications of this work are simple and straightforward with no contradictions.  He will protect and defend what is his and brooks no interference from anyone.  After all, he has killed his own brother because of his ambition to rule alone.  He is not trying to be liked for anything except his toughness and will command respect because of his accomplishments.

Both of these sculptures hearken back to the forms of Greece and Rome’s past.  Commodus’s bust reflects the Greek stylistic ideals of youth and beauty.  The unknown artist was certainly skillful and may have even been Greek since Greeks were regarded as the best artists (and teachers) throughout the entire time of the Roman Empire.  Caracalla’s portrait looks more like the sculptures of the patrician class around the first century BCE or first century CE when aged realism showed wisdom.  The less is more approach seems more Roman in style though the artist wasn’t necessarily less skilled.  The artist could have been more able to express everything he needed to without elaboration.   I think that the sculpture of Commodus is much nicer to look at, he’s a handsome guy and the lion skin headdress flows around his face and frames it very nicely.  The plainer head of Caracalla is disturbing in its intensity and yet it’s only a pair of eyes framed by a face.  Commodus’ expression is lazy and relaxed, Caracalla’s is direct.  Commodus holds a club in one hand and apples in the other in what could be a punishment and reward theme but doesn’t really seem interested in the labor of administering either.   Caracalla appears prepared for action and will enforce his will by military force if necessary.   I suppose some contemporary who saw the bust of Commodus might have thought, “You’re very pretty but what are you going to do for Rome?”  Caracalla proved himself a wise and effective ruler and the right fit for his time.  The sculpture of Commodus does not reflect the real concerns arising from the fall of the great empire and so is not effective propaganda.   The head of Caracalla is effectively using his image to show a person who is not going to let the empire slide into oblivion.