Roman Sculpture in the Art Museum, Princeton University. By J. Michael Padgett, M. Fuchs, H. Meyer, R. Wenning, M. Gawlikowski, T. Najbjerg, R. G. A. Weir, R. J. Cro, M. L. Laird, J. M. Padgett, N. Papalexandrou, C. Moss, N. Aksamija, B. de Maria, J. Pollini, K. Karoglou, and M. Marton.

2003 ◽  
Vol 107 (2) ◽  
pp. 315-316
Author(s):  
Mary C. Sturgeon
Keyword(s):  
Art Museum ◽  
Princeton University

Byzantine-period lamps from Antioch-on-the-Orontes and its hinterland

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ani Eblighatian
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Art Museum ◽  
Archaeological Sites ◽  
Museum Collections ◽  
Doctoral Research ◽  
Princeton University ◽  
Byzantine Period ◽  
The University ◽  
Roman Syria

The paper is an off-shoot of the author's PhD project on lamps from Roman Syria (at the University of Geneva in Switzerland), centered mainly on the collection preserved at the Art Museum of Princeton University in the United States. One of the outcomes of the research is a review of parallels from archaeological sites and museum collections and despite the incomplete documentation i most cases, much new insight could be gleaned, for the author's doctoral research and for other issues related to lychnological studies. The present paper collects the data on oil lamps from byzantine layers excavated in 1932–1939 at Antioch-on-the-Orontes and at sites in its vicinity (published only in part so far) and considers the finds in their archaeological context.

Isis, Sarapis and Demeter in Antioch Of Syria

1982 ◽  
Vol 75 (2) ◽  
pp. 189-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick W. Norris
Keyword(s):  
Art Museum ◽  
Ancient World ◽  
Major Difficulty ◽  
The Third ◽  
Princeton University ◽  
Serial Number ◽  
Mystery Religions ◽  
The World

When we deal with religious phenomena, we are not always fortunate enough to find explanatory texts. That is particularly true of the mystery religions and thus should be expected when we look at the materials concerning Isis, Sarapis and Demeter at Antioch of Syria. But in this instance we are faced with special problems. First, the texts are so meager that we are forced to turn to the artifacts in order to grasp at all the influence of these religions within the third largest city of the ancient world. Second, and more important, the effort to collate all the artifacts is at present impossible. The reports of the excavations in Antioch from 1932–39 were only published in a shortened preliminary form. For that we must be thankful, but it does mean that exact locations and dates of certain finds are quite difficult to obtain. Furthermore, the collections of materials primarily are divided between the McCormick Art Museum at Princeton University, the Louvre in Paris, and the local museum in Antakya, Turkey. Separate pieces, however, are scattered over the world. The materials at Princeton and Paris are accessible, but those at Antakya are limited in most instances to the ones on display. The major difficulty in retrieving the excavated materials comes not from bureaucratic obstinacy in Turkey. I received significant assistance from both Selhattin Asim, cultural director of the Hatay region, and Nizamettin Bati, director of the museum, during two visits to Antakya in 1976 and 1977. The major problem lies in the fact that the serial numbers recorded in Antakya bear no resemblance to those published in the preliminary reports. Literally hundreds of artifacts are housed in the Antakya museum which have not been studied in any thorough way. If this serial number conundrum could be broken, much more light could be shed on conditions in Antioch. For now, only preliminary studies of available pieces can be offered. Within such studies, arguments from silence are quite questionable. The task in this article is to discuss the texts and artifacts known to me in order to correct some inaccuracies of interpretation and to add color to the picture of Hellenistic religion in Antioch of Syria.

Fried, Michael (1939--)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Danielle Child
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Art Criticism ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
American Art ◽  
Art Museum ◽  
Late 20Th Century ◽  
Princeton University ◽  
Clement Greenberg ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Canonical Texts

Michael Fried is an American art critic, literary critic and art historian. Fried is most well-known for his art criticism, which contributed to the debates on modernist painting and sculpture that were played out in the pages of American art journals, such as Artforum, during the 1960s. In 1958, while studying English as an undergraduate at Princeton University, Fried met Clement Greenberg, whose theories on modernist painting influenced Fried’s subsequent writings and art criticism. He later studied under Richard Wollheim while at Oxford University. The formalist influence of Greenberg’s art criticism is prevalent in Fried’s two canonical texts on modernist art: "Three American Painters: Kenneth Noland, Jules Olitski, Frank Stella" (1965), the catalogue essay for an exhibition curated by Fried at Harvard’s Fogg Art Museum; and "Art and Objecthood" (1967). The former focuses upon three second-generation New York School painters, considered to be "high modernist." The latter is a defense of modernist painting against a new form of three-dimensional work that he terms "literal," now known as minimalist, sculpture. The argument initiated in these two essays formed a key moment in the debates that defined late-20th-century modernist art history. In the late 1960s Fried moved away from writing art criticism, focusing instead on modernist art in the 19th and early-20th centuries. He recently returned to contemporary art with his text Why Photography Matters as Art as Never Before.

African Arts at the Princeton University Art Museum

African Arts ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 72-89
Author(s):  
Kristen Windmuller-Luna
Keyword(s):  
Art Museum ◽  
Princeton University
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document