The Temple of Antoninus is a much more interesting monument; the portico

of six columns in front, and two on each flank still exists, not indeed

entire, but so as to exhibit almost every part. These columns are of

cipollino, and are very beautiful, but have been terribly maltreated by

those who at one period made them part of their habitations. Parts of

the sides also remain, exhibiting the construction of the wall of great

blocks of peperino, apparently once covered with marble. The frieze is

beautiful, but I need not tell you about a thing which has been so often

figured and described. The cornice is, I believe, the only good ancient

example of the Corinthian order, which has neither dentils nor

modillions, indeed, in all the parts, we find a breadth and simplicity

of character which was hardly to be expected in the age of the

Antonines.

On the same side of the way is the Church of the Saints Cosmo and

Damiano, said to have been anciently the temple of Romulus and Remus.

The entrance is by a plain, but handsome, ancient bronze door. It is

however, doubtful, whether this belonged originally to the building. By

this, you pass into the vestibule, a circular room covered with a dome,

the width and height of which in the present state, are about equal, but

the pavement has been considerably raised. This is, I think, all that

can pretend to any relation with the ancient temple, and whether it was

really a temple dedicated to Romulus and Remus, must remain doubtful.

Here were discovered the fragments of the marble plan of Rome, now

deposited in the Capitol. Beyond this is a nave of the seventeenth

century, erected by Urban the Eighth; at least what we see internally is

of that period. Externally, we may discover some ancient walls of great

blocks of peperino, but not sufficient, or not sufficiently exposed, to

enable us to understand their distribution. Beyond the nave is the

ancient tribune, covered with mosaics. The Roman antiquaries consider

the dedication of this church to two brothers, a proof that the original

building was a temple of two brothers, and consequently of Romulus and

Remus. Unfortunately, the ancient church had no connexion with the

vestibule, which is the only remaining part of Roman times, and the

union was not effected till the restorations by Urban the Eighth. The

argument therefore makes against their proposition. The old walls of

peperino may indeed have belonged to such a temple, but neither do these

appear to have had any connexion with the circular building in front.

Nearly opposite to this, (but we have already passed a little too far)

are three columns of Jupiter Stator, or of Castor and Pollux, or of the

Comitia, for all these names have been assigned to them. The Roman

antiquaries are much more successful in oppugning the opinions of

others, than in establishing their own. However, the plan which has been

pretty completely discovered by the excavations lately made, determines

it, although deficient in the usual number of columns at the sides, to

have been a temple; and the opinions of the wise seem to lean to Castor

and Pollux, as rebuilt by Tiberius, though I believe some other notions

are still floating among them. The vulgar call it by the name of Jupiter

Stator, and we will if you please follow the vulgar, as this is the name

by which it is most generally known. Whatever it was, we may fairly

pronounce it to have been the most perfect building of which any remains

now exist in Rome. I do not mean the most beautiful, for in that, tastes

may differ; but that in which science, skill, and attention, have been

most carefully and invariably employed in the design, in the drawing,

and in the execution. In the capitals of Mars Ultor, the arrangement of

the division of the leaves is differently managed, even in parts of the

same capital, apparently from mere inattention; in the fragment of

Jupiter Tonans, though the execution was laboured to excess, yet some

parts of the drawing are faulty; and in the portico of the Pantheon, the

execution was so much neglected, that no two intercolumniations are

exactly alike; there are considerable differences in the capitals, and

in the pediment there is one modillion more on one side than on the

other. There is no appearance of any of these faults in Jupiter Stator,

and there are no other buildings we can put into comparison with it,

unless it be the Forum of Trajan, of which we have not sufficient

remains to enable us fairly to institute a parallel. Of the general

design indeed, we have hardly in any case materials for judging, but the

plan and disposition of this temple, bear at least evidence of a careful

consideration. The building is of white marble, so that the substance,

as well as the workmanship, contributed to the effect of magnificence.

The entablature is finely proportioned. It is decidedly Roman in taste,

which some persons perhaps may think a defect, and others consider a

beauty. The frieze is plain, while one band of the architrave is

ornamented; this deviation from the usual practice does not seem to me

well judged. In the Erectheum at Athens, we find a plain frieze

accompanied with a great deal of ornament, not on, but below the

architrave; but in that case the frieze was of black marble, and though

now unadorned, the holes in it prove it to have been once enriched with

figures of metal, probably of gilt bronze. There is no appearance of any

thing of this sort in the temple of Jupiter Stator. The foliage of the

capital is extremely different from that of the Pantheon, or indeed of

any other example in Rome, presenting much broader and flatter surfaces

to the light; whether this is better or worse, I will not pretend to

determine, but I may assert that the present is very beautiful. The

upper tooth of each division of the leaves hardly crosses the lower side

of the division above; the second touches without crossing. Mons.

Caristie of the French Academy, is at present engaged in making a

restoration of this building, and for that purpose following out the

minutest details with the greatest care and accuracy; it was he who

pointed out to me many of the particulars I am going to mention.

You know that the shaft of a column usually enlarges a little at the

bottom, and terminates in a fillet above the base. This enlargement,

with the fillet, is called the _apophysis_, and may usually be described

in the section, by a quarter of a circle, of an inch or two radius, but

in this example, the curve seems to be that of an extremely eccentric

ellipsis, extending some feet up the shaft, and influencing its general

form, so as to reduce it to a continued flowing serpentine line, from

top to bottom. This curvature is so gentle, as not to be perceptible

without the most careful examination, but nevertheless, has its effect

in giving grace and elegance to the columns. It is quite a mistake to

suppose that a variation of form, not immediately cognizable by the eye,

must therefore be useless; every artist has felt, that these slight

changes influence the beauty of the composition, without being

themselves obvious, even to a skilful observer. These columns have stood

upon a continued pedestal, and under that, is another, or sub-pedestal,

containing an arched opening under each intercolumniation. Each pedestal

has had its own cornice. In front a flight of twenty-eight steps led

from the Via sacra up to a portico of eight columns. This flight of

steps was singularly divided into three parts, by two masses of masonry,

or pedestals, as perhaps we may call them, of the height of the

sub-pedestal. The middle, and by much the largest portion, continued in

a straight line from top to bottom; the two side ones were turned

laterally.

The solid construction of this temple was as remarkable as the

disposition of its basement. Under all the columns and walls, the

masonry was formed with great blocks of travertine, and similar blocks

formed the external circuit of the building. The greater part of the

intermediate spaces was filled up with rubble work. The travertine has

been an object of plunder, and the walls are now traced by the vacancies

between the masses of rubble, which was not worth the removing. Even the

blocks under the intervals of the three remaining columns, have been

taken away, and they stand now entirely detached from each other,

(except by some iron ties inserted for their preservation) from the

foundation to the architrave, twenty feet more than the proper height of

the column.

From the temple of Jupiter, let me take you to that of Peace, a building

of very different style in every respect. The remains consist of three

great arches of brick and rubble, nearly of equal size, and of some

foundations of piers, which exhibit themselves above ground. The plan,

which you may see in almost any book of Roman architecture, has been a

room, about 248 feet long, and 195 wide, composed of a nave, or central

part, which is vaulted with three groined arches, and which has on each

side three large recesses, rising about as high as the springing of the

principal arches, and occupying nearly their whole width. These groined

vaults have had the appearance of resting on eight Corinthian columns,

or rather on detached entablatures over such columns. It was probably

intended, by throwing the weight on such slender, and apparently

inefficient props, to give to the whole an exaggerated appearance of

lightness; the attempt seems injudicious; yet the same sort of

arrangement in the existing hall of the baths of Dioclesian is generally

admired. The Romans, this is my present theory, had a sort of

architecture borrowed from the Etruscans, before they had much

intercourse with Greece. The ornamental parts have presented arches, and

niches, and Tuscan columns, which were little more than the wooden props

from which the idea of a column has been derived. To this they

afterwards added the triglyphs, characteristic of the Doric order; and

thus made what is now called the _Roman_ Doric, but which till lately

used to be considered as the genuine order; and imported also the other

orders. From these materials, about the time of Augustus, they formed an

architecture of their own; combining with the severe, and as they

probably felt it, somewhat monotonous simplicity of the Greek forms, the

arches and niches of the Etruscan mode of building; and executing their

works on a large scale, and with a magnificence and fulness of ornament

peculiar to themselves. The power of vaulting their apartments, enabled

them to combine magnitude and solidity, both real and apparent; and they

no sooner felt the effect thus produced, than they began to abuse their

powers in sacrificing every thing else to this union. The great hall in

the baths of Caracalla, was perhaps, the first remarkably successful

effort of the sort; at least we know of nothing earlier, for it is not

clear that there was any thing of the kind in the baths of Titus. The

novelty was admired, extolled, and imitated; and this great room, called

the Temple of Peace, and the great hall in the baths of Dioclesian, were

built upon the same model. Palladio inserts a similar apartment in the

baths of Nero and Titus, as well as in those of later date; but we know

not his authority, and the progress would be the same though we should

assign an earlier date to the commencement of the practice. It is

impossible to deny the impressive effect produced by these ample spaces,

and bold construction, whatever was the edifice in which they were first

introduced, or not to regret, that it should have occasioned the entire

disregard of all chaster, and less ostentatious beauty, both in the

masses and in the details. Whatever was the motive of this disposition,

its effect in the Temple of Peace is now entirely lost, as the great

vault is gone. The stucco panelling of the side-vaults is in a fine free

style, but the details are bad, and the execution poor; a circumstance

which we have the opportunity of determining by a large mass of vault

lying on the ground, with a considerable portion of these ornaments

remaining. The backs of the two side recesses, each with two ranges of

comparatively small arches, never could have had a pleasing appearance

by any mode of finishing, and the circular recess is still worse in

design; but the latter was a posterior addition, made to convert the

edifice into a Christian church. Of the great order, the whole

entablature is clearly exhibited at one corner, being not continued from

one column to another, but returning in itself upon each. Considerable

fragments of a smaller order are lying about, presenting continued

straight lines, and not contemptible either in design, or workmanship,

although not very correct. A third order ornamented the circular recess,

and we have also several fragments of the entablature of this part,

overloaded with ornaments which are ill drawn, and ill executed. One end

wall of the nave seems to have been finished in a manner similar to

those of the ends of the two side recesses; the other has a large niche.

We may perhaps trace in this arrangement the first idea of the

distribution of the Roman churches. Recent excavations have proved that

the plan has hitherto been imperfectly understood. The original entrance

was at the end, and the building formed a great hall, terminating in a

large niche, and having three tribunes, square on the plan, on each

side, each of which terminated in two rows, each of three arched

recesses, some, or all of which, were windows. The middle tribune on one

side was opened at some period later than the conversion of Constantine,

and a flight of steps made up to it, while a semicircular extremity was

added to the opposite tribune; so that what had been the nave, or

leading division of the hall, became the transept of the church,

although larger than the part which thus had the effect of a nave, as is

the case at present in the church of the baths of Dioclesian. Many of

the paving bricks are marked with the name of Domitian, but this does

not amount to a proof of the date of the edifice, and the execution of

the parts shows decisively, that it is not, in its present state, of the

age of Vespasian, as has been supposed. It is possible that the mass of

the building might be of the time of that emperor, yet I doubt if the

introduction of these immense groined vaults can be placed so early.

There are indeed some very fine fragments, and in particular, a

beautiful piece of cornice with dentils, but without modillions, which

now lies in the adjoining church of Santa Francesca Romana. These were

plundered from other buildings; and the artists of that we are now

examining, have shown their degeneracy by their clumsy imitations. The

stucco work, which must have been made for the building, is still worse

than the marble. The circular recess on one side has long been

acknowledged to be an addition, but the present opinion does not assign

to the whole edifice an antiquity much higher than the reign of

Dioclesian, or perhaps of Constantine, but the apparent change of its

destination, from some profane purpose, probably into that of a

Christian church, make me suppose that it must have been, in its

original form, prior to the latter emperor.

From the temple of Peace we have but to cross the way to the Arch of

Titus. This is the oldest triumphal arch existing in Rome, and it has

perhaps been the most beautiful. It contained only a single opening, by

which means the side intercolumniations are rather smaller than where

there are also two smaller arches; and I think this improves the general

composition. You know that this building was erected in commemoration of

the defeat of the Jews, or rather of the destruction of the Jewish

nation by Titus; and part of its interest is derived from the sacred

utensils sculptured in its bas-reliefs.

At the distance of a few steps from the arch of Titus, we find two

temples, placed back to back, sometimes called the temples of the Sun

and Moon, but I am better satisfied to believe them the temples of Venus

and Rome, designed by Hadrian, and criticised by Apollodorus. The

criticism was too just to be forgiven, and it cost the unfortunate

artist his life. Ruins have more claim on our attention, when we know,

or fancy that we know, something of their history, and here the

probability is much in favour of their connexion with the story.

Palladio restored these temples with a portico, or rather loggia to

each, of six columns, and four pilasters, not the height of the

building. It seems more probable that each had a lofty decastyle portico

and pediment, as is usual in temples. Uggeri, who has given a plan on

this supposition, says that he has made them peripteral, instead of

amphiprostyle, but in fact, both his design and that of Palladio are

amphiprostyle. In order to effect this, he has crowded his columns too

much, and if there were ten of them, the building was in all probability

peripteral. It was inclosed in a peribolus, surrounded by a peristyle of

granite columns of considerable size, many fragments of which still

remain.

Underneath the wall of this building, we see a slab of white marble,

apparently the remains of a pavement of that material: this is thought

to have belonged to Nero’s golden house. Some other foundations have

been found by digging, which are attributed to the same source. We will

now pass to the Coliseum, without stopping to examine the shapeless

fragment of a fountain, or aqueduct, called the Meta sudans. What an

immense mass! You walk round it, and within it. You pace its long

corridors, or stand on the top of its half ruined vaults, and

everywhere, and in every part, and from every point of view, the same

impression occurs of enormous magnitude. You may visit it again and

again, and you will still feel this one character eternally repeated. To

the painter, in its present state of ruin, it offers many picturesque

combinations and admirable studies. The antiquary may delight in tracing

the various parts, and imagining their uses; but to the architect it

does not say much. As a whole it is a mere mass, with little merit of

design or execution. None of the orders are good, and the mouldings are

indifferently drawn and worse executed, as might be expected from the

manner in which it was raised. Yet on the whole, the details of the

architecture are better than I expected from the engravings. It is

curious, that although the arches are semicircular, and of small span,

the arch-stones are joggled;[43] this would seem to indicate no great

confidence in the form of the arch, and consequently not much habit of

using it, at that time. Travertine, brickwork, and rubble are intermixed

in the construction, and the ancient pavement in some of the passages so

exactly resembles Dutch clinkers, that I should have had no doubt of

their being such, had I met with them in England. This building has

suffered tremendously, as every one knows, by furnishing materials for

the Roman palaces. Lately, a part which threatened to fall, has been

supported by a vast brick wall of no inconsiderable expense.[44] During

the residence of the French it was cleared out both internally and

externally, and some curious construction, partly of blocks of

travertine, partly of brick, and small, rough masonry, was discovered in

the arena: the use and date of these have been much disputed. Some of

the slighter walls have been supposed to have been erected by the

Frangipani family, which had here established a dyeing-house; but they

are all now filled up, not however to the former level, for the present

arena is said to be eight feet lower than it was.

Almost close to the Coliseum, is the Arch of Constantine, shining like a

jay, says Milizia, in borrowed feathers. Much of the sculpture

represents the exploits of Trajan, and was doubtless taken from an arch

dedicated to that emperor, but it has been disputed whether Constantine

transferred them from the arch in the forum of Trajan, or whether he

altered and restored an arch upon the spot. The latter supposition is

inadmissible, since the bases of the pilasters are of Constantine’s

time, judging, as we may fairly do in this case, by the workmanship;

while those of the columns, which are so much more exposed to

destruction and to change, are antique; and of the sixteen internal

angles made by the cornice, points also very much protected by their

situation, not one is entirely of the more ancient execution. The parts

of architecture not made for this arch, are very beautiful, but rather

perhaps in a more delicate style than that of the fragments remaining of

the forum and basilica of Trajan. The general form and proportion of the

edifice are also good.

Letters of an Architect, From France, Italy, and Greece. Volume 1 [of 2] · 第 34 / 47 段