Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Roman Archictecture Leaving Certificate Classical Studies Trajan's Column P.177 100 foot in height, the carved bands winds spirally for 215 yards up ward- it was erected in the Roman forum in AD 113 to commemorate and illustrate the emperors two Dacian campaigns It is a “masterpiece of Roman historical art” –the great relief was tricked out with colour it could be seen at easier range from the roofs of the two libraries that lay at either side of the column Illustration 157 P.179 At the bottom the roman army emerges from a fortified city and cross the Danube in two columns, one of the columns is led by Trajan himself – the busy life of the river is vividly shown – the river god Danube, surveys the goings on from a nearby cave – then the emperor is seen outside the camp – later on he holds a war council- there after he is veiled as the high priest readying a sacrifice to mark the beginning of the campaign. He “harangues” his troops whilst fortifications are being built –later on a captured spy is brought before him. Trajan is everywhere! Through a long succession of mounting episodes details of the campaigns, (some of them very ordinary) are shown with authority and liveliness – we learn more about the roman army in the field than any other single document The action flows un- hesitatingly from episode to episode The strange convention of the continuous style works , as does that other convention whereby further figures rise head and shoulders above nearer ones The perspective is at sixes and sevens but this serves to add to the “Tumultuous vivacity of the scene” We find ourselves committed to the midst of a crowd of men hurrying about with their business - the calm commanding figure of the emperor is close at hand. Trajan’s column is “ history scribed around the presence of a great man- the apotheosis of the individual” Trajan’s Column The Great Trajanic Frieze P. 180 Illustration 159 From the 2nd century – reworked into the arch of Constantine at Rome AD 312 – the features of the mounted Trajan were altered to resemble those of Constantine The frieze originally came from the temple of the deified Trajan – the monument also depicts the Dacian wars, but in a more “monumental and constrained manner” – the display on the frieze seems over crowded and lacks the easy continuity that marks the display of events on Trajan's column “never again ..was the full mastery of that column repeated” Arch of Titus P.191 Illustration 176 The Arch of Titus located in the Roman forum, constructed AD 81 The triumphal procession swings through the depicted triumphal gate shown in three quarter view, this is “is nearly right” – “The figures in behind the front series are shown effectively in low relief” Soldiers parade through the arch, bearing the spoils from the Jewish wars of AD 70 There was a failure in classical art to work out the mechanism of perspective..this helped a little to impede the further development of landscape as a mode in its own right” – referring to Vitruvius, the appearance of buildings were rendered conventionally in stage scenery – some of these background scenes may seem to be receding, other projecting P.186. In other words the background landscape with its buildings adding to the overall narrative of the event being shown had not yet reached a maturity in terms of perspective Arch of Titus P. 192 –Illustration 177 The imperial chariot faces the front – the horses are in “awkward echelon” – the “spatial problem” fails to be understood or comprehended. “The failure was final” – The chariot of Titus marks a “turning point in classical art”. Wheeler seems to be saying that the perspective is not done right In this scene the emperor returns in triumph after his conquests of Judea 71 AD – the sculpture made an incomplete attempt at perspective and there is a hint of the frontality which was more evident in later reliefs. Arch of Septimus Severus P. 193, Illustration 178 This is a relief from the arch of the emperor Septimus Severus at Lepcis magna AD 200 The emperor is in his chariot and his attendants “confront the viewer, conforming with the Eastern principal of “frontality” The problem is that the emperor confronts the viewer from a distorted vehicle The figures behind are carved in serried rows that was conventional in western art from the time of Trajan but survived longer in the east. The idea of the emperor facing us was to highlight his importance, lesser figures line up at the back – they are not significant. Overall the promotion of the emperor, (cult, propaganda etc.) was more important than having the perspective and background landscape right, this seems to be Wheelers point? Capitolium at Ostia P39 Illustration 18 Built of brick with marble veneer, (i.e. outside of the building faced with marble) Wheeler describes it as an “imposing structure” The building is raised on a lofty podium and approached by a flight of steps The building is situated to the northern end of the Forum The temple is dedicated to Jupiter to , Juno and Minerva Maison Carree at Nimes P. 92 Illustration 68 “An example of monumental Augustan architecture” located in southern France Built probably 16 BC “The most complete remaining example of temple architecture of the Augustan Age” It is externally complete – the original podium stood on a platform surrounded by porticos which framed the forum Its deep porch has 3 open bays on each side The attached columns extend around the sides and back of the shrine The order is Corinthian (and the columns are fluted) Carved in local limestone – the frieze is of tendril pattern – the abaci show the band of flute-like leaves, are “characteristic of the early empire” Temple of Bacchus P.93-94,95,98 External – Unusual is the surrounding colonnade, (for a Roman temple) It stands on a high podium Peripheral, (i.e. colonnade around the outside of the temple), colonnade is of unfluted Corinthian columns It has a deep porch, at the front, with six fluted columns in width The surrounding portico is roofed with a convex ceiling of richly carved blocks with framed busts of the gods: Mars, Ganymede, Ceres, Vulcan and others Convex Ceiling Of Temple of Bacchus and Plan of Temple Temple of Bacchus P.93-94,95,98 Interior – The cella is flanked by Corinthian pilasters, set on a dado and enlarged by fluted Corinthian half columns on pedestals Between the pilasters are two tiers of niches, the lower round headed, the upper with triangular pediments. At the western end (inside the temple) through a monumental stairway one approached an “elaborate baldachin” The whole concept was astonishingly rich – stone “groaned underneath the weight of its own Luxuriance” The temple holds a “unique place in the history of architecture” The Pantheon P.104-105 Externally – It is an “outstanding survivor of a circular, (Roman) temple” It was the work of Hadrian about AD 126 It was dedicated to the 7 planetary deities, Externally it is a building, - even when you remove the veneer and stucco - of “no special account” The disharmony of the portico and rotunda is “thoroughly uncomfortable” It, (the portico) seems detached from the great building it screens, (i.e. the rotunda) “the traditional portico was attached disharmoniously to the rotunda” The Pantheon P.103 Interior – “is unsurpassed” – the weight of the building is lightened by wall recesses – “strong is the walled lines of the coffered dome”. The opening in its summit is “bold” – this interior is one of man’s “rare master pieces” “Technically the Pantheon owes its design and quality to the use of concrete and brickwork for the structure of its immense dome” The dome was a Roman contrivance aided by the “development of concrete, or stiffly mortared rubble in the 2nd Cen’ BC Stabian Baths P.108, Illustration 85 The many baths of the Roman empire made “an outstanding contribution to the general development of plan and structure” Even a small town might well have two or more baths – the gathering of rooms of varying shapes and sizes within the discipline of a “systematized function” provided a recurring creative exercise which had far reaching consequences Early baths such the stabian baths at Pompeii lacked “coherence – these baths illustrate this “immaturity” , the plans were “untidy” Hadrian’s Baths P.108, Illustration 86 In this bath building a “succession” of interior and different buildings were reconciled “in an overall harmony”, by means of vaulted and colonnaded openings An open air swimming pool was surrounded on three sides by three Corinthian porticos and flanked by a pair of colonnaded halls Beyond these on each side was the latrine From the swimming pool four doors opened on to a corridor surrounding the cold room, (Frigidarium”) Hadrian’s Baths P.110, Illustration 88 This splendid hall is paved and panelled with marble The roof has three concrete cross vaults springing from 8 Corinthian columns At each end of the hall arched doorways opened on to the cold plunge-baths A central door way at the back connected the hall with the warm room “Tepidarium” Beyond that was a hot room “Caldarium” – this was a large barrel vault room with arched windows On each side of this hot room – there was a pair of superheated rooms – these rooms were the “Laconica” or sweating baths. Wheeler is implying here that these baths had a tidy, coherent and harmonious structure and plan. This plan was aided by a system of vaulted ceilings, arched open ways, supported by columns etc. Roman Baths, (Caracalla P.16) Baths of Caracalla –AD 211- 217 – When you went to the baths to meet your friends and to work off the night before – there is one thing you did not do, “you never glanced at the untidy complex of domes and gables outside as you entered” – a notable example of this are the hunting baths at Lepcis magna, whose functional exterior is “confused” Baths of Diocletian, P. 17 and 18 Built AD 302 – It was the inside that mattered, with its towering wall spaces that stretched the minds of architect and sculptors and gave a sense of “well being and importance to patron or client” Illustration 5 is a reconstruction of the bath house of Diocletian here we view the tepidarium towards the frigidarium Basilica at Lepcis Magna P.56 illustration 36 The emperor Septimus Severus was born here – he made the city of his birth more splendid by adding a new forum and building to the settlement – these new buildings were “both architecturally and sculpturally of outstanding distinction among the buildings of the empire” – the forum was surrounded by colonnades with arches springing from stiffed leafed capitals At the north eastern end of the forum is an imposing basilica It has three isles hall with an apse at each end, the height is about 100 feet Its columns were of red Egyptian granite and green Euboean marble The Pilasters of white marble at both ends were carved with reliefs of Dionysus and Hercules – patron gods of the Severan family. Basilica Roman London P. 83 Was the administrative centre of Roman London The building was 500 feet long with 3 isles and an apse at the eastern and probably western end There was a row of 18 offices and along the northern side It was probably build after the destruction of the old town after a revolt in AD 60-61 “The magnitude of this central official building, combining the functions of a town hall, law court and general business centre shows “the administrative and commercial importance “ of Roman London at that time. Basilica at Cosa P. 113, Illustration 90 This small basilica is from middle of 2nd century BC Vitruvius describes this type of basilica with the entrance on the long side and the magistrates tribunal opposite the entrance Colonnaded halls or basilica were not unknown to the Greeks The building of municipal basilica annexed (beside) the market place was a “Roman invention” The earliest known examples go back to the middle of the 2nd cen’ BC when the romans used concrete ant the dome parallel with high vaulted ceilings, this marked a new era in “architectural thinking” Basilica Pompeii P.113, Illustration 91 Built before 78 BC Differs from the Vitruvius Basilica at Cosa Here the hall is oblong, it has an internal ambulatory, (entrance) –which leads one into the building from the short side The tribunal is marked out within the far end The functional axis of the building is that of the “length and not the breadth” Both the Pompeian and Vitruvian basilica were in existence side by side, at the end of the Republican period and early Empire, (circa 45-30 BC) The Pompeian Basilica later on influenced the design of Christian churches Basilica Nova P.114-115 Basilica Nova is the “most imposing” of them all – it is situated in the Roman forum Began by Maxentius AD –finished by Constantine after AD 313 Three massive cross vaults of the nave reach 114 feet, their lateral thrust was eased by partitions carried across a broad isle on either side The western end was strengthened by an apse The eastern end had a narrow entrance lobby pierced by five doors Externally the roof was enriched by bronze tiles, inside the walls were faced with marble. With the combination of light and colour the whole spectacle must have been “memorable” Constantine changes the functional axis of the building by adding an apse on the northern side and a formal entrance on the southern Triumphal Arches Early arches were functional – but in a society as showy and as wealthy as the Romans it was only a matter of time before the were used for commemorative or memorial purposes “Triumphal arches became a symbol of empire – travelled emperors such as Trajan or Hadrian built many of them. In Rome alone there was least 50 The Arches with their strongly lettered and beautiful dedications are a outward sign of the personality cult which lies at the heart of the imperial idea As early as the 3rd century AD the Roman writer Pliny could still describe the triumphal arch as a “new fangled idea” Arch of Titus P.157, Illustration 139 Majority of these arches had a single opening, especially in the western half of the empire This single opening was flanked by attached or detached columns with sculptured panels On the top of the arch was a surmounted attic which bore an inscription, - letters cut into the stone – sometimes with free standing figures, sometimes made of gilded bronze and often including a chariot drawn by horses or elephants The arch of Titus, 81 AD (Rome) above its single opening the attic has a carved inscription – on top was a surmounted “Quadriga”, or 4 horses lead by charioteer Arch of Constantine P.158, Illustration 140 Built by the emperor Constantine, Ad 312-315 Earlier works and reliefs were taken from other monuments and reworked into the arch The three way arch allowed for a more extensive attic, above Also in this arch we have richer decoration and ornamentationthe development of the triumphal arch as an art form had come some way since those simple un-decorative, sometimes very functional arches we see at Timgad P. 154, or Lepcis Magna, P. 155 Roman Villa’s P. 126 – 127, 128 At Pompeii, the oldest houses consisted of rooms grouped around a court yard or atrium, which usually contained a tank for rain water This was considered the principal room The introduction of four or more columns about the tank, was a further elaboration and gave the room the appearance of a Greek portico Sometimes above the tablinium there was a room of limited height with a balcony. At the back of the house there might be a small garden. Wealthier houses were able to construct a peristyle, or colonnaded garden (along Greek lines) with rooms around the garden. Outside Italy the atrium scarcely existed Beyond the atrium was the tablinium, either open fronted or screened by a curtain – two recess at the right and left lead to the back of the villa and this meant that one did not have to go through the tablinium to access the back of the villa There was another type of villa called a Rhodian. Here the inner range of courtyard was higher than the porticos at each end – the roof of the portico’s rested on brackets jutting out from its “angled columns”, (P.127, Illustration, 107) Between these passageways at the front of the house were private rooms This all emphasised the importance of the inner room – which was equal to the importance of the tablinium of the Pompeian villa Roman Villas Roman Villas Insulae P. 129 - 130 These tenement blocks needed to be built for the increase in population and rising ground rents especially in cites such as Ostia and Rome Building grew upward rather than outward As early as the 3rd cen’ BC Vitruvius was writing about these buildings which were made of brick and concrete, (wood being frequently used for the upper stories) Dangers included fire and collapsing The emperor Augustus limited them to 70 feet in height, later on Trajan to 60 feet Blocks of five to six stories were easily within the law Externally the buildings were “ severely functional” – they were built of unfaced brick, arches or lintels of doors tended to be enriched, by vermillion paint. Pillars or pilasters might adorn main entrances Sometimes balconies were carried on projecting stone or timber corbels or brick corbelled vaulting The flats or apartments were reached from courtyards or from the streets by a stairs often set between ground floor shops Walls and ceilings in the better off establishments were elaborately painted There is an absence of structural heating or private sanitation Insulae The Colosseum Exterior “the greatest work of architectural engineering left to us by Roman antiquity” It was built by the Flavian emperors within the last quarter of the of the first century AD on the site of the lake of Nero’s Golden House Its tiers of arches, its superimposed orders in the form of half columns and its crowning range of pilasters – (i.e. arches flanked by the three orders of classical half columns, Dorian, Ionic and Corinthian – with square pilasters on the top tier) It was to become the pattern for “Renaissance architecture” The Colosseum Interior – the floor has been excavated to reveal its “intricate vaulted substructure”, (rooms below the floor of the arena) Could hold 45000 seated spectators “behind the sorry story of human and animal bloodshed which they represent, these sombre memorials, (i.e. amphitheatres) have a creative aspect which may not be ignored” – Wheeler believes these amphitheatre have left a legacy of architectural creative genius, irrespective of why they were built – i.e. blood sport The amphitheatre at Pompeii The original gladiatorial games were held in the open market The first (“earliest structural”) amphitheatre was at Pompeii Built after 80 BC This is a paradox – because this part of Italy owed much to Greek colonisation – and we must remember that the blood games were a Roman invention – In the Greek speaking part of the Roman Empire this less edifying form of entertainment rarely took hold - “to the credit of the humane Greek tradition” The Amphitheatre is oval in shape and could hold 20,000 spectators. Gladiators and wild beasts entered through tunnels on each end. A external stairs, outside the amphitheatre: steps led the viewers up to rows of seats Theatres The Greek theatre was essentially a structure of open air – Roman theatres whether it had a permanent roof or not, “conformed with the Roman trend towards enclosed interiors” Its scaenae frons, the elaborately adorned back wall of the stage, rose to the full height of the semicircular auditorium and was joined to it by lateral returns so that the audience were “entirely withdrawn from the world without” A large theatre could be sheltered by an awning, and holes for the attachment of the front ropes can be observed in the forward edges of some of the lower tiers of seats The scaenae frons of the theatre of Aspendos – shown here - built in the second century AD “is the best preserved theatre in Asia Minor” Theatre at Orange It is possible that masonry corbels (on the roof of this theatre) carried masts at the top of the auditorium and stage buildings for securing the backs of the awning, (awning is the canvass roof that sheltered over the stage area) In some cases there was a “permanent pent roof above the stage” Roman Theatres In Greek stages the orchestra was circular with a central altar and was used by the cast during performances In Roman theatres the orchestra was “reduced to semicircular” embodied in the auditorium and “reserved for movable of semi-permanent stalls” Although based on Greek prototypes, the Roman theatre was a “Roman creation” Note the theatre shown here at Lepcis Magna built in AD 1-2. The back scene or scaenae frons and curved rows of seats are well preserved The theatre at Sabratha “The outstanding feature of the major imperial theatres was the back scene, the scaenae frons” These back scene might be sumptuously enriched by tiers of colonnaded niches with statues” These backgrounds were “elegant” but the entertainment they were build for “must often” have not been particularly edifying , (or graceful) Note the theatre at Sabratha – with its elegant colonnaded scaenae frons – or stage background Elaborate Architrave over a temple door, (1st picture) and single Colonnade lining a street in a Roman provincial town, (2nd picture) Cross vaulted ceiling (old Roman Bath house) - - and arches springing from capitals Fluted Corinthian Capital on Architrave, (1st picture) – Columns of the Dorian order, (2nd picture ) Cornice decoration and Pediment over a door of a warehouse (1st picture Capitals of the Ionic order – capitals designed like scrolls, (2nd picture) Arch decorated with vermillion painting (1st photograph) and lay out of a Roman town, (2nd Photograph) - note position of the arch)