to be treated in the section upon sculpture; in Rome the architectural
pedestal was more important than the statuesque carving, and, indeed,
the image was frequently supplanted altogether by inscriptions. Statues
were often placed upon columns. These were often provided with
characteristic decorations--as is the case with the prows of vessels
upon the shaft of Duilius, erected in 260 B.C.--and were often of
gigantic dimensions, thus withdrawing the figures upon their summits
from close inspection. The most sumptuous example of these monuments is
presented by Trajan’s Column, the base of which contained the
sarcophagus of that emperor. The surface of the shaft was either covered
with reliefs of many figures which, like the interior staircase,
ascended spirally upward, as upon the Columns of Trajan and of Marcus
Aurelius, or were merely treated with architectural forms like the
granite column of Antoninus Pius, the relief upon the pedestal of which
is given below. (_Fig._ 304.) There are similar shafts, dating from the
Roman occupation, at Cussi in France, at Alexandria, Constantinople, and
Ancyra. In all these works the portrait was far exceeded in importance
by the monument; sculpture was rendered subordinate to architecture.
This was the case in a still greater degree in the triumphal and
commemorative arches. As the equestrian statues and quadrigas have
disappeared from all the works of this kind now preserved, it might
easily be forgotten that these figures were in reality the principal
part of the composition, and the arches beneath them little else than
pedestals placed above the streets, and consequently provided with
passages. Festive portals constructed of light timbers and decorated for
gala-days doubtless afforded the prototype for these works. Triumphal
arches were comparatively rare in the time of the republic, but very
common under the emperors. They express the nature of Roman art better,
perhaps, than any other class of structures: the mass of masonry,
encased in columns and entablatures which were merely ornamental
features without constructive functions; the reliefs of small figures
crowded together as in a chronicle; the numerous decorative statues
above the columns as well as upon the top; the extended inscriptions
upon the attic above the arches, which thus formed, in a more restricted
sense, the pedestal of the crowning group--these all express
characteristic tendencies, and present the best example of the solid but
ostentatious construction which predominated in Roman architecture,
subordinating ideal beauty to the temporary purpose. Augustus, Trajan,
and Hadrian were the chief builders of these monuments, which have
remained in all the provinces of Rome: at Benevento, Ancona, Rimini,
Susa, and Aosta in Italy; at St. Remy, Orange, Besançon, Cavaillon, and
Rheims in France; at Alcantara, Merida, Bara, and Caparra in Spain; at
Theveste and El Casr in Africa, etc. There are four of these arches in
Rome--two with a single passage (those of Drusus and of Titus [_Fig._
285]), and two (those of Septimius Severus [_Fig._ 286] and of
Constantine) with additional openings on either side. The Arch of
Constantine surpasses its known predecessors in beauty of composition
and proportion only because it was patterned after an arch of Trajan,
and even built with the same materials. This arch is at once the
memorial of one of the most important victories recorded by history, the
battle near the Milvian Bridge, and of that unexampled poverty of
artistic invention, or rather want of productive energy, which
characterized all Roman intellectual life after the time of Constantine.
[Illustration: Fig. 286.--Triumphal Arch of Septimius Severus.]
The so-called Janus portals were erected above the streets and squares
of Rome, much in the same manner as the triumphal arches. They were
commonly simple, like the three Jani upon the Forum Romanum, but were
increased at street-crossings to extensive quadrifrontes, or structures
presenting the same face upon all four sides. The former bore two-faced
Jani upon their summits, the latter a four-faced combination like that
upon some figures of Hermes--an image well adapted to represent the
watcher over the crowded thoroughfares. The Janus Quadrifrons upon the
Forum Boarium (_Fig._ 263) is, with exception of the attic, particularly
well preserved; it was richly ornamented by the statues of deities, no
less than thirty-two niches being provided upon its walls.
[Illustration: Fig. 287.--Section.]
[Illustration: Fig. 288.--Plan of the Primitive Roman Basilica.
Restoration by Reber.]
[Illustration: Fig. 289.--Plan of the Basilica of Maxentius.]
The buildings which surrounded the public squares corresponded in lavish
magnificence to the altars, statues, dedicatory columns, and triumphal
arches. Broad colonnades with shops formed the enclosure, interrupted by
temples, and courts of justice, or curias, which can have differed but
little in external appearance from the sacred edifices. Most important
among these public buildings were the basilicas, which, in name,
purpose, and form, were derived from Greek prototypes. As halls of
justice and places for commercial traffic, they may be regarded as
covered extensions of the open squares. Several of these buildings,
erected during the imperial epoch, are known by considerable remains,
but they deviate so greatly in disposition as to have no plan in common
beyond that of a hall surrounded by narrow aisles. The oldest Roman
structure of this kind, the Basilica Porcia built by Cato in 185 B.C.,
was of an oblong shape, abutting with one of its ends upon the Forum,
while the other was enlarged by a small exedra, or apse. (_Figs._ 287
and 288.) The chief space was surrounded upon all four sides by
two-storied aisles, the central hall, however, not rising above them, as
in the Christian basilica, this being difficult of construction because
of the slightness of the shafts, and not necessary for the introduction
of light. A portico with a flat roof was erected above the entrance,
enlivening the bare and extended front wall. Thus the Basilica Porcia
did not differ in principle from the early Christian church, and the
similarity appears also in the other basilicas of the Roman republic,
all of which had their front upon the smaller side. In the courts of the
imperial epoch, however, this primitive type was treated with great
freedom, and nothing remained of the original arrangement but a large
central hall surrounded by a double passage of arcades upon piers,
without columns and without an apse. The normal basilica, described by
Vitruvius, with two-storied side aisles, faced with its greatest length
upon the public square, and had an apse; the basilica at Fanum, built by
the Roman writer, was similarly arranged upon the facade, but a
clere-story supported upon gigantic columns rose above the lateral
passages. These passages opened, from the end opposite the entrance,
into an adjoining temple, the pronaos of which served as the tribune of
the forensic court. The basilica at Pompeii, of which the narrow side
was the front, had no apse, while the Basilica Ulpia had great exedras
upon both ends, with the entrance portal upon the longer side. The
Basilica of Maxentius (_Fig._ 289), which was completed by Constantine,
was an exception in every respect, being entirely vaulted, and having
two apses upon adjoining sides opposite to the two chief entrances. The
whole formed one of the most remarkable and important halls of
antiquity, with the consideration of which the history of Roman
architecture may well be terminated. The original type of the basilica
was wholly neglected by later architects, who treated the problem of a
forensic hall without restrictions, utilizing the accidental formations
of the ground, while endeavoring to combine suitability and the display
of ingenious constructions with magnificent novelties of their own
invention.
[Illustration: Fig. 290.--Section.]
[Illustration: Fig. 291.--Plan of the House of Pansa in Pompeii.]
[Illustration: Fig. 292.--Flavian Palace.
A. Tablinum; B. Lavarium; C. Basilica; D. Atrium; E. Dining-hall
(Œcus); F. Nymphæum.]
[Illustration: Fig. 293.--Court of the Palace of Diocletian at
Spalatro.]
The Roman dwelling-house was, in the earliest ages, identical with that
of Etruria, and, indeed, of all Central Italy. Although related to
Hellenic prototypes, the peculiarly Italian atrium, without columnar
supports for the roof, remained in use even after the general
introduction of the Greek peristyle. At Pompeii a combination of these
two varieties of court is met with, the front space being a simple
atrium, and that further within a peristyle. Each enclosure was
surrounded by chambers. (_Figs._ 290 and 291.) The mosaic and painted
decoration of the floors and walls will be treated in a later section.
The small chambers were lighted only through doors opening from the
inner courts, and did not share in the architectural importance
assigned to the larger halls, which, in the last years of the republic
and in the imperial period, transformed the houses of the wealthy into
veritable palaces. With the luxury of the table, the magnificence of the
dining-room was increased; and, with the growing taste for literature
and art, extensive libraries and galleries of pictures became prominent
features. Many of the forms adopted for this palatial architecture
appear to have been derived from the later Greeks; the designation of
halls, as those of Egypt and of Kyzicos, employed by Vitruvius, pointing
to the sovereignties of the Diadochi. This enlargement of extensive
rooms by columns was, however, in a great degree supplanted by vaulting,
in which case the columns were introduced merely as decorative members.
Much attention was devoted to a lavish enrichment of these rooms, the
shafts being colored marble monoliths, the lacunæ of the vaulted
ceilings overlaid with bronze or richly gilded, and the capitals being
sometimes formed of solid metal. One of the halls in these palatial
residences, the private basilica, though it may not have been universal,
deserves especial consideration because of its great importance in later
times. Such courts of justice are mentioned by writers of the Augustan
age as forming part of the dwellings of men of condition, “because in
their houses councils were held upon public and private matters, and
civil cases decided.” These halls were naturally modelled in a great
degree after the public basilicas upon the forums, such as the Porcian,
Æmilian, Sempronian, and Opimian basilicas, which had been built during
the republic; but they appear, when compared with the primitive type of
the Roman basilica, to have differed fundamentally in two respects. In
the first place, the hall, being surrounded by the chambers of the
dwelling, could not be provided with windows like the free-standing,
forensic basilicas, and a clerestory rising above the adjoining rooms
was consequently adopted. This rendered necessary a second modification.
To impose a heavy wall of masonry, besides the timbered ceiling and
roof, upon a double story of columns must have seemed inadmissible to
the Roman taste for substantial construction. The aisles upon the front
and rear were consequently given up, the columns and galleries remaining
upon the sides only, the massive masonry of the enclosure thus receiving
the thrust of the clere-story wall, and greatly increasing its
stability. (_Fig._ 292.) This loss of continuity could have been of no
great disadvantage in the private basilica, as it did not serve, like
the free-standing public structures, for traffic and promenades, as
well as for sessions of justice. The galleries over the side aisles were
frequently omitted, and it appears to have been in these halls that the
connection of columns by arches, in the place of lintels, was first
introduced. Such archivolts are first known by examples built during the
reign of Diocletian, as at Spalatro (_Fig._ 293); but they soon came
into general usage, their practical advantages outweighing the want of
æsthetic fitness inherent in such curved entablatures. It was from these
private basilicas that the first Christian churches were architecturally
developed. The believers had assembled, during the imperial ages, in the
houses of wealthy converts; and as these halls of justice had been used
for religious services during times of persecution, it is not strange
that, after the recognition of Christianity by the Roman government,
their arrangement and even their name should have been retained.
[Illustration: Fig. 294.--Fragment of the Cista Prænestina.]
* * * * *
In Roman architecture were found great intelligence in the solution of
the constructive problems involved in the enclosing of large spaces,
great independence in the development of technical perfection, and a
masterly conformity to the purpose of the structure; but Roman
sculpture, although of very extended application, had less independence
and significance. The Romans, originally too practical to provide a
place for the beautiful beside the useful, first gave decided admission
to this art when the political growth of the world’s metropolis had
reached the acme of its power; and even then they transferred the
question of sculpture to foreign artists in their employ. In the earlier
republican period, their practice of this art was scarcely worthy of
mention; in the time of the kings, or, at least, until the year 170 of
the city, sculpture seems not to have existed in Rome, or only to have
been employed in the ornamentation of utensils like the Cista Prænestina
(_Fig._ 294) with Phœnician-Etruscan anthemions and figures of
animals riveted on. If these may be considered rather as a direct
importation from Etruria and the neighboring Grecian and Phoenician
colonies than as their own work, it may be said that the Romans of this
period had no images of the gods.
[Illustration: Fig. 295.--Janus Bifrons upon an Ancient Roman Coin.]
The first work of statuary which appears to have been exhibited in Rome
was by an Etruscan, Volcanius, or Volca, from Veii. This was the
colossal Jupiter sitting upon a throne, ordered by Tarquinius Priscus
for the Capitoline Temple. Formed of terra-cotta, the face colored red,
and wearing upon the head a chaplet of oak-leaves--originally, perhaps,
of bronze, but afterwards of gold--it appears, with the exception of the
head, to have been but slightly modelled, as it was covered with an
embroidered garment. A Hercules within, and the quadriga upon the gable
of the same temple, both also of terra-cotta, are ascribed to this
artist. The chariot was, in 296 B.C., replaced by a bronze, which ninety
years later was gilded.
Even from the beginning the tone of Roman sculpture was affected by
Grecian as well as by Etruscan influences. The image in the Temple of
Diana built by Servius Tullius upon the Aventine was a xoanon--a rude
puppet of wood imitated from the Artemis of Massalia (Marseilles)--a
work after the manner of the Ephesian Artemis, and consequently still
undeveloped, and, at the best, Daidalian. Two generations later a more
advanced Hellenic style obtained, when, in 493 B.C., two Greeks of Lower
Italy, Gorgasos and Damophilos, decorated the Temple of Ceres with
paintings and figures of terra-cotta. Eight years later, these were
followed by the three divinities of the temple--Ceres, Liber, and
Libera--which were the first bronze statues in Rome. But, at the same
time with the work of the Grecian artists, and as if to prevent a
decided Hellenic preponderance, the wooden image of Juno Regina was
brought from Veii to Rome; and this cannot have been without effect upon
the figures of Fortuna Muliebris, consecrated four or five years later,
in 487 or 486 B.C. In the epoch next following, rife with civil wars and
misfortunes of every kind, the pursuit of art seems to have languished,
and its necessities to have been met chiefly by booty from the conquered
cities of Etruria, though many of the subjects were Roman, like the
Janus Geminus, copies of which have been preserved upon coins. (_Fig._
295.) Of this period are the Vertumnus and the Lavinian Penates, and
especially the first portrait statues of heroes like those of the
Ephesian Hermodorus, the interpreter among the lawgivers of the
Decemvirate, in 450 B.C.; of Ahala and L. Minucius, as protectors from
usurpation, in 439 B.C.; and of the four ambassadors murdered by the
Fidenates, in 438 B.C.
Art first became more active when, at the close of the Samnite war, in
288 B.C., the Roman authority began to make itself felt in the Grecian
towns of Lower Italy. Then originated the rich sculptured ornaments of
the Forum--the statues in honor of Mænius, Camillus, Tremulus, and
Duilius, and also of the Greeks Pythagoras and Alkibiades, commanded by
the oracle; further, as shown by Detlefsen to be probable, portraits of
the Sibyls, and of Attus Navius, Horatius Cocles, M. Scævola, and
Porsena, falsely attributed to earlier times. The Capitol was decorated
by statues of the seven kings, and of Tatius and Brutus; and the Via
Sacra, besides those of Romulus and Tatius, with an equestrian statue of
Clœlia. Nothing remains of these works, which were almost exclusively
of bronze, and only one sacred figure gives any illustration of their
technicalities and style--the Wolf--now preserved in the Capitol.
Although the two sucking children are lost, it is probably the one
consecrated by Ogulnius under the Ruminal fig-tree, in 295 B.C. (_Fig._
260.) Without doubt, the characteristics of this period were more
Italian, or, according to the usual term, Etruscan, than Greek; and, in
considering the sculptures generally, the predominant influence in the
portrait-statues may be ascribed to the Etruscans, and, in those of a
devotional character, to the Greeks, since it was from the Greeks that
the Romans chiefly borrowed this type.
[Illustration: Fig. 296.--Statue of Isis. (Museum of Naples.)]
Two other works preserved from the third century B.C., and designated in
the inscription as by Roman artists, show plainly the conflict of the
two tendencies. The first of these is the celebrated Cista of Ficoroni,
made in Rome, with the inscription of Novius Plautius engraved in the
ancient character, found near Palestrina (the ancient Præneste), and now
in the Kircherian Museum in Rome. Its chief feature, an episode from the
legend of the Argonauts, represented in _sgraffito_ upon the vessel, is
so purely Greek that it might be regarded as imported ware were it not
for the accessories--the bulla, bracelet, and shoes--which point to
Italy, perhaps to Lower Italy. According to Mommsen, Plautius was from
Campania. The handle and feet, on the contrary, are entirely Etruscan,
and exhibit quite a different tendency. Though the name of the artist
and the dedicatory inscription are placed upon the handle, they cannot
relate to these castings, which are of quite ordinary manufacture, but
rather to the engraving, Plautius having obtained the vessel ready-made
in Rome, where he worked. The second of these works, nearly
contemporary with the other, is a small head of Medusa, in high-relief,
with the artist’s name upon it, C. Ovius, from the Tribus Aufentina. In
this the two factors, Grecian and ancient Italian, which formerly stood
side by side, appear to blend, and thus to perfect what must be
designated as the specifically Roman style.
But at the close of the second Punic war, about 200 B.C., began the
extensive importation of statues, first from the Grecian cities of
Italy, afterwards from Greece proper. It has been related how Rome, in
150 B.C., became the central point of Grecian activity in art, and the
seat of that renaissance which followed the past stages of Hellenic
artistic development in reversed succession. As the Roman deities had
become throughout almost identical with those of the Greeks, and as the
statuary that ornamented the squares, streets, gardens, baths,
fountains, houses, and villas were either Grecian spoil or copied from
celebrated Hellenic originals, there remained for the peculiarly Roman
art, as it had arisen from the combination of Etruscan and Hellenic
elements, only a comparatively small field.
[Illustration: Fig. 297.--Relief of Mithras. (In the Louvre.)]
The Grecian stamp was given, so far as might be, even to those deities,
such as Juno Lanuvina, who, on account of their decided individuality,
could not be exchanged with those of the Greeks, nor with the gods
borrowed from the Oriental mythology. This did not, indeed, flourish in
the West until the late times of Hellenism, two centuries B.C., and
appeared, for the most part, still later in Rome, as shown by the
worship of Isis, and the frequent statues of that goddess (_Fig._ 296)
and of Harpocrates, and by the Persian homage to Mithras, with its
sacrifice of bulls. (_Fig._ 297.) It was the same with the uncommonly
numerous Roman personifications and allegories, the individual type of
which was, as a rule, quite commonplace and without expression, the
intention of the artist being recognizable only by attributes. A draped
female figure, such as the Flora or Pudicitia, might be a Concordia,
Constantia, or Fides; a Pax, Libertas, or Securitas; a Virtus, Justitia,
or Æquitas; a Salus, Pietas, or Annona--according to what was placed in
the hand, upon the head, or at the feet; the age, garments, or position
being rarely taken into consideration. With the male representations the
difference in regard to nudity and manner of clothing (_Figs._ 298 and
299) was greater, and the interchange of related deities facilitated, as
in the use of Hermes for Bonus Eventus. In personifications the
character, garments, and attributes were doubtless more marked. To the
most celebrated works of this kind belong the figures of the fourteen
nations conquered by Pompey in the Porticus ad Nationes. These were
executed by Coponius, the only distinguished sculptor certainly known
with a Roman name. We may, perhaps, consider these as analogous to the
Germania Devicta (Thusnelda) in Florence, but probably, after the manner
of representations of Asiatic cities upon the base of Puteolani, they
were more varied and less cold than the mere allegories of abstract
ideas. Generally, in carrying out these conceptions, individuality of
characterization in the figure or the action was not attempted, a
certain common correctness, grace, and superficial beauty being held to
suffice.
[Illustration: Fig. 298.--Vertumnus (Silvanus). (In Berlin.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 299.--Relief of Bonus Eventus. (British Museum.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 300.--Statue of Augustus. (In the Vatican.)]
In portraiture, the Roman sculpture developed far more speciality and
meaning. The early tendency of ancient Italian art towards the
individual has already been described, and it may easily be understood
that, in the line of portraiture, this had an important influence, even
after Hellenic art had completely established itself upon the Tiber. In
this province it best served its purpose. Still, it is evident that the
vacant, external individualization peculiar to the primitive works of
Etruria and Rome, such as the wax masks of their ancestors, required
improvement by greater expression of life and character, for which
Lysippos, in portrait-sculpture, had so decidedly opened the way. By the
combination of these two elements, the portraits became the most
successful works of Roman sculpture. The Hellenic tendency to idealize
prevailed in those statues which presented the person heroically--as
Achilles, for instance--or were rendered divine by attributes of Zeus,
or Apollo, Juno, Ceres, Venus, and others. The figure was then usually
nude, and was only so far imitated from life as to give to the head the
true features, with a certain transfiguration. This treatment,
exemplified in many of the statues of Antinous, had prevailed in
Hellenic art since the time of Lysippos, the great master of
portrait-sculpture. The native Italian tendency, on the contrary, had
sway in the so-called “iconic” statues; in those, namely, in which the
personal and human character was carried out. In these the clothing was
given with more detail and significance; as, for example, in the figures
of the emperors wearing the toga (_statuæ togatæ_), or the presidents of
the senate. Others are represented as high-priests, with the drapery
drawn over the back of the head; others (_statuæ thoracatæ_) as
field-officers, in coats of mail, as, among many examples, in the
celebrated Augustus of the Vatican, found, in 1863, before the Porta del
Popolo. (_Fig._ 300.) In these the action generally chosen seems to have
been that of address to the senate or to the army. Equestrian statues
belonged chiefly to the _thoracatæ_, though they appear also in
conception like Achilles, nude, or clothed only with the himation. As
they were all of bronze, few remain; so that the Marcus Aurelius upon
the Capitoline, notwithstanding its hardness and other faults, is the
most celebrated, and has become the standard for countless modern
statues. The figures upon chariots, on the contrary, and especially
those which ornamented the triumphal arches, were, for the most part,
_togatæ_. The mention of triumphal groups with six pairs of horses, or
of elephants, shows to what extreme of tastelessness Roman art had
become debased in the time of the emperors. The better works of this
class are most suitably represented by the four bronze horses, falsely
ascribed to Lysippos, which were brought by the Venetians from
Constantinople in 1204, and which have been placed over the portal of
St. Mark’s Church in Venice. Iconic female statues are distinguished by
careful imitation of garments falling in rich folds, and, even in the
early times, by exaggerated head-dresses, which gave them the appearance
of fashion-plates. Noble ladies, sitting comfortably, and with dignity,
in arm-chairs, are among the most successful of Roman works. Yet there
is in all these portrait-statues, especially in the usual oratorical
gestures, a typical character as little to be mistaken as is the
softening influence of Hellenic idealism in most of the heads. Without
injuring the individuality, it increases the beauty and heroic elevation
of the entire figure. Not unfrequently, however, instead of inner
significance, we find merely richness of drapery and detailed
accessories, particularly in reliefs upon coats of mail, etc.