repetition of the volutes upon all four sides--by which the nature of
the Ionic capital was destroyed, and the spiral treated in the early
Asiatic manner as mere ornament--the Corinthian capital had come into
general and popular use. It has already been explained, in the section
upon Hellenic architecture, that the Corinthian capital attained no
typical form in its native country, and could not be ranked with the
Doric and Ionic styles, being a mere variety of the Ionic capital
without any individual formation of the shaft and entablature. The
Corinthian columns of the uncompleted Temple of the Olympian Zeus at
Athens, which Sulla transported to Rome about the year 84 B.C. for the
rebuilding of the Temple of Jupiter Capitolinus, were, if not the first
in Rome, at least those which were in later times taken by Roman
architects as typical examples of their style. The Roman architect
justly preferred the Corinthian capital because of its capacity for more
varied application, without that fatal difficulty at the corners
inherent in the Ionic style, and because of its rich effect, even when
less carefully and delicately detailed. The preference for the
Corinthian may be justifiable, but that form of Composite capital into
which it developed, by a multiplication of its ornaments and the
addition of four spirals upon the corners, must be regarded as a
debasement. (_Fig._ 273.) The fact should not be overlooked that this
arrangement of acanthus around a concave kernel best solves the problem
of the capital as a mediating member between the vertical support and
the horizontal entablature, as well as between the circular plan of the
shaft and the rectangle of the epistyle. (_Fig._ 272.)
The leaves and tendrils of the capital were at last introduced into the
entablature, which thereby assumed a peculiar character, and permitted
the Romans, for whom the forms of Hellenic architecture were nothing
more than a decorative mask, to place the Corinthian, as an independent
order, by the side of the Ionic and the Tuscan or Doric. As the
Corinthian base had been formed by a combination of the Ionic and Attic
mouldings, the consoles of the cornice resulted from a fusion of Ionic
dentils and Doric mutules. The simplicity and slight projection of the
dentils did not suffice for the requirements of florid Roman
architecture; the horizontal mutules without guttæ, characteristic of
the later Tuscan style, consequently took their place, supported by the
spiral brackets which had been already employed as the parotides beneath
the cornices over Ionic doorways. A richly foliated ornamentation fully
harmonized these new members with the acanthus capital, and gave to the
entire cornice an independent importance and a certain lavish elegance,
soon, however, debased by the extravagance of the decorators. Continued
increase of ornament resulted in a want of attention to the general
composition--a loss which the multiplication of the details could ill
supply, especially as they were without even formal beauty.
[Illustration: Fig. 272.--Corinthian Capital from the Pantheon.]
[Illustration: Fig. 273.--Composite Capital.]
The sacred buildings of the Romans have been considered thus at length
because offering the best opportunity for a characterization of the
orders; yet the significance of their national architecture is not to be
found in the temples, but rather in their structures for public utility
and comfort. In these the technical naturally far exceeded the artistic
element, and it is consequently in points of construction that the great
advances of the Romans appear. In these methods they were almost wholly
independent, and were by far the most important people of antiquity.
Masonry of brick and hewn stones early attained great extent and
perfection, furthered by the excellent materials at hand--the hard
Tiburtine and Travertine limestones, the tufa so easily carved, the
unequalled clay for bricks, and the famous volcanic sand and pozzuolana
which, when combined with lime, harden to the firmest stone. Vaulting
was generally introduced as early as the time of the kings, the walls
and ceiling forming an uninterrupted mass of homogeneous materials; the
vertical and horizontal members, support and covering, being blended
together without marked transition. Before this system of construction
was invented the spacious and monumental development of protected rooms
had been possible only under great limitations; without it these chief
ends of Roman architecture could not have been attained.
The building of barrel vaults with hewn stones, as observed in the
Cloaca Maxima, was attended with certain difficulties; the great weight
of the masonry permitted a moderately large span only when immense and
cumbrous buttresses were provided. This objection was, in a great
degree, obviated by the employment of bricks, but the size of the spaces
covered was limited by the necessity of heavy supporting-walls at the
sides. The full scope of vaulted construction was not recognized until
the introduction, by the Romans, of the intersecting or cross vaults, or
the so-called groined arch. This replaced the two side walls previously
necessary to support the barrel vault, by piers upon the four corners,
at the same time opening the covered space on all four sides. The way
was thus prepared for an indefinite series of such quadrangular
compartments, or bays, covering a continuous space. A third development
of this principle, the hemispherical vault or cupola, was of more
restricted application, having been employed only for circular
buildings, or, when bisected, for apses, or semicircular additions to
the plans of rectangular temples and halls. The date of the first
appearance of the cross-vault can hardly have been earlier than the
second century B.C.
[Illustration: Fig. 274.--Section of the Aqua Marcia Tepula and Julia,
near the Porta San Lorenzo.]
[Illustration: Fig. 275.--Section of the Pantheon, in its Present
Condition.]
[Illustration: Fig. 276.--Section of the Pantheon. Restoration by
Adler.]
[Illustration: Fig. 277.--Plan of the Baths of Caracalla.]
[Illustration: Fig. 278.--Chief Hall of the Baths of Caracalla.]
The first secular buildings which attained monumental importance were
undoubtedly those erected for public usefulness, like the extensive
covered canals so requisite to the very existence of Rome. On the one
hand, it was necessary, by means of gigantic sewers, to drain the low
land, which was not only full of springs, but was periodically flooded
by the Tiber; on the other, to provide the metropolis with good water by
aqueducts extending to great distances. Still, it was not until the year
312 B.C., more than two centuries after the building of the Cloaca
Maxima, that the first work of this kind, the Aqua Appia, was completed,
simultaneously with the first great military road, by the famous censor
Appius Claudius Cæcus. This entirely subterranean aqueduct, eight Roman
miles long, was followed, down to the time of Diocletian, by no less
than thirteen similar constructions of increased dimensions and
magnificence. (_Fig._ 274.) Almost all extended to the mountains which
surround the Campagna, even reaching a length of forty-two Roman miles.
They provided so great a quantity of excellent water that one third part
of it would have been more than sufficient for the real necessities of
the city. Stupendous arches raised the conduits high above the ground,
while valleys and ravines were spanned by mighty works of engineering,
even rivalling the bridges upon the great military roads. The greater
part of the water thus obtained was used for the baths, which were
increased under the emperors to a measureless luxury, and provided the
chief means by which these rulers purchased the favor of the populace.
There were in Rome no less than eight hundred and fifty-six private
baths open to the use of every citizen for a certain price, besides the
great imperial structures which were free to the public. The first
founder of these free baths was Agrippa, in 25 B.C., who appears to have
followed, in their general arrangement, the type of a Greek gymnasion.
The bodily exercises of early times, by which the military power of the
State had been trained, were succeeded under the empire by a luxurious
care for physical well-being; gymnastic drill appeared unnecessary to
the sovereigns of all the known world, while the bath and the toilet
became more and more important. Thus, in the Roman baths, the spaces for
serious athletic contests, which had formed the principal part of the
Greek gymnasion, were wholly subordinated to the departments for
indolent luxury and light amusements. The primitive bathing-chambers
were enlarged to magnificent halls, which offered the greatest scope for
the development of that interior architecture which was cultivated with
such great success by the Romans. This grandeur is evident in the
imposing rotunda still remaining from the Baths of Agrippa, the
remarkable circular structure which, because of its beauty, was
transformed by Agrippa himself into a temple--the Pantheon--by the
addition of Corinthian columns. (_Figs._ 275 and 276.) The building, not
having been originally planned for an isolated position, is wholly
undeveloped upon the exterior, but its massive construction and
harmonious proportions have merited the admiration accorded to it in all
ages. From the existing remains it cannot be surely determined whether
the Baths of Nero, Titus, Trajan, and Commodus, which followed the great
creation of Agrippa, surpassed it in dimensions and magnificence; but it
is certain that this was the case with the enormous structures of
Caracalla and of Diocletian, as the entire plan of the former, with
parts of the mosaic pavements, still remains; while the main hall of the
latter, in almost perfect preservation, forms the chief part of the
Church of S. Maria degli Angeli. The principal structure was usually
surrounded by an extensive enclosure, which, in the case of the Baths of
Caracalla (_Fig._ 277), was formed upon the front (_a_) by a series of
separate cabinets. Upon the sides were segmental projections, or exedras
(_b_), with various chambers (_c_), probably intended for intellectual
entertainments, such as rhetorical and poetical dissertations, etc.;
while the rectangle was closed by a one-sided stadion, with spaces for
gymnastic purposes (_d_), and a reservoir for water (_e_). The central
building provided upon either side enormous halls for games, preparatory
to the ablutions (_g_, _p_), between them (_i_, _k_, _l_) the spaces for
the cold, tepid, and hot baths; while the adjoining smaller chambers
served as rooms for dressing and the manifold processes of the toilet.
Between this chief structure and the enclosure race-courses and
promenades, with fountains and beds of flowers, added the charms of
nature to the magnificence of architecture. The public Baths of
Alexander Severus, Decius, and Constantine appear to have been less
extended; but these were far surpassed in size by the constructions of
Diocletian, which could accommodate three thousand bathers. The Roman
buildings for the circus, the theatres, and amphitheatres were of
scarcely less importance. The extreme simplicity of the Circus Maximus
recalls the early Greek hippodrome; the slopes of the Palatine and
Aventine served as a station for the spectators, while the level ground
in the valley between formed the arena. It was not until 327 B. C. that
the barriers (_carceres_) were architecturally embellished, and even the
rebuilding of the whole by Cæsar was limited to the erection of the
lower stories of the auditorium in stone. The wooden superstructure was
not replaced by a more permanent and monumental construction until the
time of Domitian and Trajan. The general plan was adopted from the Greek
model, the peculiarities of the Roman arrangement being a low division
wall, or spina, the position of the barriers, and the moat which
surrounded the arena (_euripis_), intended to protect the lower tiers of
spectators during the combats of wild beasts. The spina, connecting the
two turning-posts (_metæ_), was ornamented with memorial columns,
altars, ædiculas, statues, obelisks, and the like; it did not follow a
direction precisely parallel to the side seats, but allowed a
considerably broader space upon the right than upon the left, so that
the many chariots here crowded together early in the race might not be
too greatly impeded. That all the competitors might have an equally
favorable position when brought into line, it was necessary that the
starting-points should be arranged in the segment of a circle, the
centre of which was a little to the right of the spina. This plan may be
recognized in the best-preserved Roman circuses, as, for instance, in
that at Bovillæ, near Albano, and that of Romulus, the son of Maxentius,
upon the Via Appia. (_Fig._ 279.) The Circus Maximus, like all the other
structures of its kind in Rome, has been entirely destroyed.
[Illustration: Fig. 279.--Plan of the Circus of Romulus.]
[Illustration: Fig. 280.--Scheme of the Roman Theatre, according to
Vitruvius.]
In the earlier periods of Roman history, the theatre did not receive the
recognition and assistance of the government; and the law in force until
the end of the republic, which permitted no theatre with seats to be
constructed within the limits of the city, prevented any monumental
development in this direction. Dramatic representations, however, were
not to be suppressed after an acquaintance with the Greek drama had once
been formed. Comedy was especially popular, and Roman authors devoted
their attention to it with success. But these plays were performed only
upon festival days, and were undertaken by individuals. The creation of
the improvised stage, for transient usage, thus fell to the lot of those
politicians whose desire it was to win the favor of the populace. In the
latter days of the republic structures were reared which equalled the
extravagant magnificence of the Diadochi; the ædile M. Scaurus, for
instance, erected a gigantic theatre, to stand only a few days, which
provided seats for no less than eighty thousand spectators, the stage
being ornamented by three hundred and sixty marble columns and three
thousand bronze statues. This boundless waste was brought to an end
through the building of the first stone theatre in Rome, by Pompey, who,
notwithstanding his great political power, could succeed in silencing
the objections made by the conservative party against this innovation
only by the pretence that the stone seats were the steps of a temple,
which he erected upon the summit of the _cavea_. This first permanent
structure was succeeded during the reign of Augustus by two other
theatres, those of Marcellus and of Balbus; the first could seat but a
quarter as many spectators as did the theatre of Pompey--namely, twenty
thousand--while that of Balbus provided places for only eleven thousand
six hundred. In later imperial times even this capacity was found too
great. The theatre lost much of its attraction after the Roman people
had once seen blood flow in the arena. Yet in all the Roman empire there
was scarcely a city of importance where a stone theatre was not erected
during the reign of Augustus; even small towns like Tusculum, where the
remains are particularly well preserved, boasted of these monuments. The
characteristic differences between the Roman theatre and the Greek, its
prototype, were that the orchestra did not exceed a semicircle, the
front of the stage (A A) being so advanced as to form its diameter,
which thus brought the actors nearer to the spectators. (_Fig._ 280.)
The open half of the circle was not, as in Greece, reserved for the
evolutions of the chorus, but was occupied by the senators and the
higher classes of citizens, who brought thither their own seats. The
auditorium, which, with the orchestra, had been restricted to a
semicircle, assumed a peculiar form upon the exterior, the entire
building standing in a plain, and only rarely, as in Tusculum, occupying
a natural slope. With the introduction of vaulting, massive foundations
of masonry were rendered unnecessary. Barrel vaults were placed one
above another, terminating upon the exterior in a series of arcades, the
decorative features of Roman architecture being usually so applied that
the lower story displayed engaged Tuscan columns, the second Ionic, and
the third Corinthian pilasters, with their respective entablatures. This
treatment of the exterior is shown in the best preservation by the
remaining amphitheatres; but vestiges of theatres may still be seen
sufficient to serve as illustrations, like that of Marcellus (_Fig._
281), and those at Orange in Southern France, at Aspendos in Asia Minor,
etc.
[Illustration: Fig. 281.--Theatre of Marcellus, Rome.]
[Illustration: Fig. 282.--Plan of the Flavian Amphitheatre.]
[Illustration: Fig. 283.--Section of the Auditorium of the Flavian
Amphitheatre.]
Imposing as the architectural appearance of the Roman theatre was,
magnificently and suitably as it was planned, it could never attain
great national, and consequently historical, importance, because tragedy
was never popular and comedy never political. The warlike and bloody
scenes presented by the mortal combats of gladiators and wild beasts had
a far greater attraction for a people who, by nature, felt more
reverence for Mars than for the Muses. It was long, however, before
these exhibitions were provided with especial arenas. After the
introduction of the gladiatorial contests by Marcus and Decius Brutus,
in 264 B.C., upon the occasion of funeral games, the prisoners of war
had fought together upon the Forum; and the slaughter of powerful
animals, inaugurated under Metellus by the killing of elephants taken
from the Carthaginians in 252 B.C., and continued under Æmilius Paullus
by the sacrifice of deserters to beasts of prey, had taken place in the
Circus. But this could not have been well suited to the purpose, as its
limited width was impeded by the spina, and its side barriers could not
have offered sufficient protection to the spectators from the desperate
attempts of the infuriated animals to escape. As early as 59 B.C., Caius
Curio had surprised the Roman people with two wooden theatres, built
back to back, and arranged so as to turn bodily upon their axes after
the conclusion of the scenic performances, so that the two auditories
faced one another, and left between them an arena for the succeeding
combats of gladiators. It is not certain whether this was the original
of the amphitheatre, or whether the oval plan arose from simply giving
broader proportions to that form of stadion, like the one at Aphrodisias
in Caria, which was terminated by a semicircle at each end. But it is
scarcely to be doubted that the wooden Theatrum Venatorium of Cæsar had
the disposition which was repeated, with but few alterations, in the
stone amphitheatre of Statilius Taurus, built during the reign of
Augustus, and in those of wood erected by Augustus, Tiberius, and Nero.
By the time of the Flavians it was recognized that no gift was so
acceptable to the Roman populace as the provision of a magnificent place
fitted for these inhuman games, and thus arose that most gigantic
edifice of all ages--the Colosseum. (_Figs._ 282 and 283.) Even
provincial towns like Reggio, Pompeii, Herculaneum, Albanum, Tusculum,
Sutri, Pola, Verona, Nismes, Treves, Constantine, etc., were provided
with edifices of this kind, fully as important in proportion to the
number of their inhabitants.
The mausoleums and monuments erected in honor of prominent citizens
constitute an important class in the architectural history of Rome. In
early times a tumulus form, similar to that of the Etruscan tombs, seems
to have predominated. The older monuments in the vicinity of Rome were
thus constructed. A tumulus, the lower cylinder of which appears to have
been elevated upon a square substructure decorated with Tuscan
pilasters, may be assumed to have existed above the remarkable
sepulchral labyrinth of the Scipios, outside the Porta Appia, and within
the present Porta S. Sebastiano. In course of time the circular drum of
masonry increased, while the original cone was diminished to a pointed
roof; the magnificent tombs of Cæcilia Metella, the wife of Crassus, and
of the Plautii upon the Via Appia and Via Tiburtina, show it as already
preponderating. The tumulus of Augustus upon the Via Flaminia, at
present within the Porta del Popolo, displays a cylinder of 24 m. in
diameter, decorated by thirteen niches once provided with statues; while
the cone of earth above, which was archaistic agreeably to the
affectation of Augustus, was planted with cyprus-trees and terminated by
a colossal image of the imperial builder. Even more gigantic was the
mausoleum built by Hadrian, the lower portion of which now forms the
substructure of the Castle of S. Angelo. It was once surmounted by a
second smaller cylinder bearing a conical roof. When the area at
disposal was too limited for the adoption of so extended a base, the
monument rose, like a tower, to a great height, in successive stories of
decreasing dimensions, with or without columns, as in the fine example
of St. Remy in Southern France. The endless rows of tombs upon the Via
Appia vary from simple piers and subterranean burial-chambers (called
_columbaria_, from the thousands of niches for funeral urns resembling
the nests of doves) to colossal mausoleums. The remains of bulwarks
prove that many of these elevations were utilized for mediæval
fortresses. Even foreign forms were employed; the so-called Tomb of the
Horatii at Albano resembles that of Porsena, while the Egyptian pyramid
is reproduced in the mausoleum of C. Cestius near the Porta di S. Paolo.
The conformation of the land presented but little opportunity for the
execution of rock-cut tombs with a front carved in the cliff; but one
remarkable example has been preserved upon the Lake of Albano, called,
from the twelve fasces introduced in its decoration, the Tomb of the
Consuls. In the mountainous provinces of the East these sepulchres were
more common, as, for instance, in Petra, where numbers of façades hewn
in the rock, with a kind of decorative temple-like architecture, betray
magnificence rather than good taste. (_Fig._ 284.)
[Illustration: Fig. 284.--Façade and Section of a Rock-cut Tomb at
Petra.]
[Illustration: Fig. 285.--Triumphal Arch of Titus.]