Comparative Analysis of the Symbol of Power

In a comparative analysis of the two styles of Roman mosaics, it is evident that there exists a clear evolution in the depiction of power as symbolized in the mosaics of many gods depicted in the Early Roman Empire versus the depictions of Christ in Late Roman Empire mosaics.
Since the mosaics were actually physically attached to the ground, early polytheistic creations give the images a strong connection to the earth. The gods were portrayed as existing in the same environment as humans, as opposed to mosaics constructed on ceilings, which would create an aura of superiority accompanying the image.

Though the figures were given symbols of power, they were powerful in the real world, with a connection to the earth and therefore a stronger unity with the people. They could actually relate to a greater extent with the Roman civilians who idolized them. This is also apparent in the images of Neptune in which he is placed in a sea environment. Rather than connecting him to an other-worldly scene, he is portrayed in the real world, in an environment that is part of the human existence. His power stems from the apparent ability to dominate over the powerful ocean, rather than simply exist in a heavenly context looking down on the tempestuous sea.

Conversely, because the later Christian representations were physically distanced from the ground and placed in a sort of sky setting in which one must look toward the sky to even view the art, a strong attachment and connection to the heavens is created. Christ was portrayed as existing above the world of humans, in a totally different, finer environment. Indeed a significant aura of superiority is created with these visual tools.

The figure of God is given symbols of power, including gold, jewelry, and a halo. This creates the effect of giving him power not only in the real world, but in the heavenly setting as well. It separates him from the common people to a significant degree, though the occasional connection with the common people is resolved through his somewhat drab clothing.

 

These observations seem to express an evolution not simply in the depiction of godly power, but rather seem to involve the Romansí changing attitudes in how they judged power as a people. In the early era of the Roman Empire, one was deemed powerful by his commanding over something in the real world, whether it be the ocean, the land, or an empire. Physically strong, this man is a figure of great respect and courage, expressing an air of triumph and success and conquering. He is a powerful warrior, with fortitude and strength.

These notions shifted drastically toward the later era, with Christ portrayed as a physically scrawny and weak character. No more the courageous warrior god, he existed as a symbol of peace, sympathy, and inner strength. Rather than control, his depiction expresses guidance. Rather than power and fortitude, he emits kindness and care. As a society, the Romans began to view their god(s) as no longer a source of physical strength, but instead a source of emotional strength.

Instead of the domineering, tough, commanding society that once was called the Roman Empire, what began to take hold was the scholarly, thoughtful, peaceful Roman Empire. One that looked over the hurt, the poor, and the weak. One that instead of giving its citizens the courage to fight, gave them the courage to think and question and do good. No longer the conquering empire struggling for power, this once domineering nation turned inward in its later years, as evidenced by its evolution in its symbolic depictions of power. The Roman Empire began as a power-hungry brute, seeking physical strength and command in its leaders; but, as it grew, its tough, dominating urges evolved into scholarly, sympathetic, and wise Empire.