Trajan\'s Column V Adamklissi

[Tarbicus]

Whereas Trajan's Column may have been carved by foreign slaves who had never seen a legion in action.
There is, not one iota of evidence for this. This basically grows out of the old canard that Romans were not capable of such a high classical style...

In 'The Artists of the Ara Pacis; the process of Hellenization in Roman Relief Sculpture', by Diane Atnally Conlin, she firmly believes the Greek master theory must be abandoned. The book is the result of an in-depth analysis of the monument, right down to the chisel marks, which she refers to as "technical signatures". I haven't read it all yet (it's a fairly weighty tome), but she seems to know her stuff. Bearing in mind the Ara Pacis was created late 1stC. B.C., that surely leaves plenty of room for established Italian-Roman workshops to have created Trajan's Column, imho. The point being that slaves did not actually carve Trajan's Column, but artesans and manumitted men who had undergone training outside of Greek workshops.

Btw, here's an example of Dacian figurative art for reference: Bronze bust (goddess Bendis)

The sketchbook theory's interesting, but what would they sketch on? Wood? Or would they have, or be given the means, for expensive papyrus or vellum to doodle on whilst at the frontier? Kind of an Imperial war correspondent reminiscent of the 19th Century. I personally struggle with that picture somehow, but then I don't know Richmond's work.

why is such a gaffe to assume some sort of 'military advisor' overseeing aspects of the work

I mentioned a paper in the Segmentata thread that proposes the military where great patrons of the arts in the provinces they were stationed, and was encouraged as part of the Romanisation of the local population. I think it's utterly feasible that the sculptors in Dacia had plenty of input from the Roman military there, which would explain the accuracy of the content if not the forms. Perhaps back in Rome the column had a military advisor in the form of a young tribune with an eye for the Arts who had spent some time in Dacia? Alternatively, a member of the Imperial Court who had accompanied Trajan, but had no eye for military detail, which would give a reason for the accuracy of the forms but not the content? That assumes the TC segs are wrong :wink: