wood; for although the use of stone for bridges, walls, &c., had been
general, all houses and temples were invariably built of wood until
the recent employment of foreigners led to the erection of brick and
stone buildings. The consequence has been that nearly all the old
temples have been burnt down and rebuilt several times; and though it
is probable that the older forms were adhered to when the buildings
were re-erected, it is only by inference that we can form an idea of
the ancient architecture of the country. The heavy curved roofs which
are so characteristic of Chinese buildings are found also in Japan,
but only in the Buddhist temples, and this makes it probable that this
form of roof is not of native origin, but was introduced with the
Buddhist cult. The earlier Shinto temples have a different form of
roof, which is without the upward curve, but which has nearly as much
projection at the eaves as the curved roofs. Where the buildings are
more than one storey in height the upper one is always set somewhat
back, as we saw was the case in the Chinese pagodas, and considerable
and pleasing variety is obtained by treating the two storeys
differently. Very great skill in carving is shown, all the posts,
brackets, beams, and projecting rafters being formed into elaborate
representations of animals and plants, or quaintly conceived
grotesques; and the flat surfaces have frequently a shallow incised
arabesque pattern intertwined with foliage. The roofs are always
covered with tiles, and a curious effect is produced by enriching the
hips and ridges with several courses of tiles in cement, thus making
them rise considerably above the other portions of the roof. A
peculiar feature of Japanese houses is that the walls, whether
external or internal, are not filled in with plaster, but are
constructed of movable screens which slide in grooves formed in the
framing of the partitions. Thus all the rooms can easily be thrown
together or laid open to the outer air in hot weather. All travellers
in Japan remark upon the impossibility of obtaining privacy in the
hotels in consequence of this.
The Shinto temples are approached through what might be termed an
archway, only that the arch does not enter into its composition. This
erection is called a Torii, and is thus described by Professor
Conder:[9]--"It is composed of two upright posts of great thickness,
each consisting of the whole trunk of a tree rounded, about 15 ft.
high, and placed 12 ft. apart. Across the top of these is placed a
wooden lintel, projecting considerably and curving upwards at the
ends. Some few feet below this another horizontal piece is tenoned
into the uprights, having a little post in the centre helping to
support the upper lintel." These erections occasionally occur in front
of a Buddhist temple, when they are built of stone, exactly imitating,
however, the wooden originals. This is interesting, as offering
another proof, were one needed, that the curious forms of masonry
exhibited in much of the work of the early nations, some of which has
been described, is the result of an imitation of earlier wooden forms.
The chief effect in the buildings of the Japanese is intended to be
produced by colour, which is profusely used; and they have attained to
a height of perfection in the preparation of varnishes and lacquers
that has never been equalled. Their lacquer is used all over their
buildings, besides forming their chief means of decorating small
objects. It is, however, beginning to be questioned whether the old
art of lacquering is not becoming lost by the Japanese themselves, as
the modern work appears by no means equal to the old. One curious form
of decoration, of which the Japanese are much enamoured, consists in
forming miniature representations of country scenes and landscapes;
waterfalls, bridges, &c., being reproduced on the most diminutive
scale. It is much to be feared that our small stock of knowledge of
ancient Japanese art will never be greatly increased, as the whole
country and the people are becoming modernised and Europeanised to
such an extent that it appears probable there will soon be little
indigenous art left in the country.
* * * * *
It has not been thought necessary to append to this chapter analyses
of the Eastern styles similar to those which are given in the case of
the great divisions of Western Architecture. The notice of these
styles must unavoidably be condensed into very small space.
FOOTNOTES:
[6] It is not intended to imply that Hindustan has been without change
in her ruling dynasties. These have been continually changing; but the
remarkable fact is that, numerous as have been the nations that have
poured across the Indus attracted by "the wealth of Ind," there has
been no reflux, as it were: the various peoples, with their arts,
religions, and manners, have been swallowed up and assimilated,
leaving but here and there slight traces of their origin.
[7] See Chap. X. for an illustration of a Christian Basilica.
[8] See chapter on Saracenic Architecture.
[9] Paper communicated to the Royal Institute of Architects.
[Illustration: FIG. 49.--GREEK HONEYSUCKLE ORNAMENT.]
CHAPTER V.
GREEK ARCHITECTURE.
_Buildings of the Doric Order._
The architecture of Greece has a value far higher than that attaching
to any of the styles which preceded it, on account of the beauty of
the buildings and the astonishing refinement which the best of them
display. This architecture has a further claim on our attention, as
being virtually the parent of that of all the nations of Western
Europe. We cannot put a finger upon any features of Egyptian,
Assyrian, or Persian architecture, the influence of which has survived
to the present day, except such as were adopted by the Greeks. On the
other hand, there is no feature, no ornament, nor even any principle
of design which the Greek architects employed, that can be said to
have now become obsolete. Not only do we find direct reproductions of
Greek architecture forming part of the practice of every European
country, but we are able to trace to Greek art the parentage of many
of the forms and features of Roman, Byzantine, and Gothic
architecture, especially those connected with the column and which
grew out of its artistic use. Greek architecture did not include the
arch and all the forms allied to it, such as the vault and the dome;
and, so far as we know, the Greeks abstained from the use of the
tower. Examples of both these features were, it is almost certain, as
fully within the knowledge of the Greeks as were those features of
Egyptian, Assyrian, and Persian buildings which they employed;
consequently it is to deliberate selection that we must attribute this
exclusion. Within the limits by which they confined themselves, the
Greeks worked with such power, learning, taste, and skill that we may
fairly claim for their highest achievement--the Parthenon--that it
advanced as near to absolute perfection as any work of art ever has
been or ever can be carried.
Greek architecture seems to have begun to emerge from the stage of
archaic simplicity about the beginning of the sixth century before the
Christian era (600 B.C. is the reputed date of the old Doric Temple at
Corinth). All the finest examples were erected between that date and
the death of Alexander the Great (333 B.C.), after which period it
declined and ultimately gave place to Roman.
The domestic and palatial buildings of the Greeks have decayed or been
destroyed, leaving but few vestiges. We know their architecture
exclusively from ruins of public buildings, and to a limited extent of
sepulchral monuments remaining in Greece and in Greek colonies. By far
the most numerous and excellent among these buildings are temples. The
Greek idea of a temple was different from that entertained by the
Egyptians. The building was to a much greater extent designed for
external effect than internal. A comparatively small sacred cell was
provided for the reception of the image of the divinity, usually with
one other cell behind it, which seems to have served as treasury or
sacristy; but there were no surrounding chambers, gloomy halls, or
enclosed courtyards, like those of the Egyptian temples, visible only
to persons admitted within a jealously guarded outer wall. The temple,
it is true, often stood within some sort of precinct, but it was
accessible to all. It stood open to the sun and air; it invited the
admiration of the passer-by; its most telling features and best
sculpture were on the exterior. Whether this may have been, to some
extent, the case with Persian buildings, we have few means of knowing,
but certainly the attention paid by the Greeks to the outside of their
temples offers a striking contrast to the practice of the Egyptians,
and to what we know of that of the Assyrians.
[Illustration: FIG. 50.--PLAN OF A SMALL GREEK TEMPLE IN ANTIS.]
The temple, however grand, was always of simple form, with a gable at
each end, and in this respect differed entirely from the series of
halls, courts, and chambers of which a great Egyptian temple
consisted. In the very smallest temple at least one of the gables was
made into a portico by the help of columns and two pilasters (Fig.
50). More important temples had a larger number of columns, and
often a portico at each end (Figs. 50a and 55). The most important
had columns on the flanks as well as at the front and rear, the
sacred cell being, in fact, surrounded by them. It will be apparent
from this that the column, together with the superstructure which
rested upon it, must have played a very important part in Greek
temple-architecture, and an inspection of any representations of
Greek buildings will at once confirm the impression.
[Illustration: FIG. 50a.--PLAN OF A SMALL GREEK TEMPLE.]
We find in Greece three distinct manners, distinguished largely by the
mode in which the column is dealt with. These it would be quite
consistent to call "styles," were it not that another name has been so
thoroughly appropriated to them, that they would hardly now be
recognised were they to be spoken of as anything else than "orders."
The Greek orders are named the Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian. Each of
them presents a different series of proportions, mouldings, features,
and ornaments, though the main forms of the buildings are the same in
all. The column and its entablature (the technical name for the
frieze, architrave, and cornice, forming the usual superstructure)
being the most prominent features in every such building, have come
to be regarded as the index or characteristic from an inspection of
which the order and the degree of its development can be recognised,
just as a botanist recognises plants by their flowers. By reproducing
the column and entablature, almost all the characteristics of either
of the orders can be copied; and hence a technical and somewhat
unfortunate use of the word "order" to signify these features only has
crept in, and has overshadowed and to a large extent displaced its
wider meaning. It is difficult in a book on architecture to avoid
employing the word "order" when we have to speak of a column and its
entablature, because it has so often been made use of in this sense.
The student must, however, always bear in mind that this is a
restricted and artificial sense of the word, and that the column
belonging to any order is always accompanied by the use throughout the
building of the appropriate proportions, ornaments, and mouldings
belonging to that order.
The origin of Greek architecture is a very interesting subject for
inquiry, but, owing to the disappearance of almost all very early
examples of the styles, it is necessarily obscure. Such information,
however, as we possess, taken together with the internal evidence
afforded by the features of the matured style, points to the influence
of Egypt, to that of Assyria and Persia, and to an early manner of
timber construction--the forms proper to which were retained in spite
of the abandonment of timber for marble--as all contributing to the
formation of Greek architecture.
In Asia Minor a series of monuments, many of them rock-cut, has been
discovered, which throw a curious light upon the early growth of
architecture. We refer to tombs found in Lycia, and attributed to
about the seventh century B.C. In these we obviously have the first
work in stone of a nation of ship builders. A Lycian tomb--such as the
one now to be seen, accurately restored, in the British
Museum--represents a structure of beams of wood framed together,
surmounted by a roof which closely resembles a boat turned upside
down. The planks, the beams to which they were secured, and even a
ridge similar to the keel of a vessel, all reappear here, showing that
the material in use for building was so universally timber, that when
the tomb was to be "graven in the rock for ever" the forms of a timber
structure were those that presented themselves to the imagination of
the sculptor. In other instances the resemblance to shipwrights' work
disappears, and that of a carpenter is followed by that of the mason.
Thus we find imitations of timber beams framed together and of
overhanging low-pitched roofs, in some cases carried on unsquared
rafters lying side by side, in several of these tombs.
What happened on the Asiatic shore of the Egean must have occurred on
the Greek shores, and though none of the very earliest specimens of
reproduction in stone of timber structures has come down to us, there
are abundant traces, as we shall presently see, of timber originals in
buildings of the Doric order. Timber originals were not, however, the
only sources from which the early inhabitants of Greece drew their
inspiration.
Constructions of extreme antiquity, and free from any appearance of
imitating structures of timber, mark the sites of the oldest cities of
Greece, Mycenae and Orchomenos for example, the most ancient being
Pelasgic city walls of unwrought stone (Fig. 51). The so-called
Treasury of Atreus at Mycenae, a circular underground chamber 48 ft.
6 in. in diameter, and with a pointed vault, is a well-known specimen
of more regular yet archaic building. Its vault is constructed of stones
corbelling over one another, and is not a true arch (Figs. 52, 52a).
The treatment of an ornamental column found here, and of the remains
of sculptured ornaments over a neighbouring gateway called the Gate of
the Lions, is of very Asiatic character, and seems to show that
whatever influences had been brought to bear on their design were
Oriental.
[Illustration: FIG. 51.--ANCIENT GREEK WALL OF UNWROUGHT STONE FROM
SAMOTHRACE.]
[Illustration: FIG. 52.--PLAN OF THE TREASURY OF ATREUS AT MYCENAE.]
[Illustration: FIG. 52a.--SECTION OF THE TREASURY OF ATREUS AT
MYCENAE.]
[Illustration: FIG. 53.--GREEK DORIC CAPITAL FROM SELINUS.]
[Illustration: FIG. 53a.--GREEK DORIC CAPITAL FROM THE THESEUM.]
[Illustration: FIG. 53b.--GREEK DORIC CAPITAL FROM SAMOTHRACE.]
A wide interval of time and a great contrast in taste separate the
early works of Pelasgic masonry and even the chamber at Mycenae from
even the rudest and most archaic of the remaining Hellenic works of
Greece. The Doric temple at Corinth is attributed, as has been stated,
to the seventh century B.C. This was a massive masonry structure with
extremely short, stumpy columns, and strong mouldings, but presenting
the main features of the Doric style, as we know it, in its earliest
and rudest form. Successive examples (Figs. 53 to 53b) show
increasing slenderness of proportions and refinement of treatment, and
are accompanied by sculpture which approaches nearer and nearer to
perfection; but in the later and best buildings, as in the earliest
and rudest, certain forms are retained for which it seems impossible
to account, except on the supposition that they are reproductions in
stone or marble of a timber construction. These occur in the
entablature, while the column is of a type which it is hard to believe
is not copied from originals in use in Egypt many centuries earlier,
and already described (chap. II.).
We will now proceed to examine a fully-developed Greek Doric temple of
the best period, and in doing so we shall be able to recognise the
forms referred to in the preceding paragraph as we come to them. The
most complete Greek Doric temple was the Parthenon, the work of the
architect Ictinus, the temple of the Virgin Goddess Athene (Minerva)
at Athens, and on many accounts this building will be the best to
select for our purpose.[10]
[Illustration: FIG. 54.--RUINS OF THE PARTHENON AT ATHENS.]
The Parthenon at Athens stood on the summit of a lofty rock, and
within an irregularly shaped enclosure, something like a cathedral
close; entered through a noble gateway.[11] The temple itself was of
perfectly regular plan, and stood quite free from dependencies of any
sort. It consisted of a cella, or sacred cell, in which stood the
statue of the goddess, with one chamber (the treasury) behind. In the
cella, and also in the chamber behind, there were columns. A series of
columns surrounded this building, and at either end was a portico,
eight columns wide, and two deep. There were two pediments, or gables,
of flat pitch, one at each end. The whole stood on a basement of
steps; the building, exclusive of the steps, being 228 ft. long by
101 ft. wide, and 64 ft. high. The columns were each 34 ft. 3 in. high,
and more than 6 ft. in diameter at the base; a portion of the shaft
and of the capital of one is in the British Museum, and a magnificent
reproduction, full size, of the column and its entablature may be seen
at the Ecole des Beaux Arts, Paris. The ornaments consisted almost
exclusively of sculpture of the very finest quality, executed by or
under the superintendence of Pheidias. Of this sculpture many
specimens are now in the British Museum.
[Illustration: FIG. 55.--PLAN OF THE PARTHENON AT ATHENS.]
[Illustration: FIG. 56.--THE ROOF OF A GREEK DORIC TEMPLE, SHOWING
THE MARBLE TILES.]
The construction of this temple was of the most solid and durable
kind, marble being the material used; and the workmanship was most
careful in every part of which remains have come down to us. The roof
was, no doubt, made of timber and covered with marble tiles (Fig. 56),
carried on a timber framework, all traces of which have entirely
perished; and the mode in which it was constructed is a subject upon
which authorities differ, especially as to what provision was made
for the admission of light. The internal columns, found in other
temples as well as in the Parthenon, were no doubt employed to support
this roof, as is shown in Boetticher's restoration of the Temple at
Paestum which we reproduce (Fig. 56a), though without pledging
ourselves to its accuracy; for, indeed, it seems probable that
something more or less like the clerestory of a Gothic church must
have been employed to admit light to these buildings, as we know was
the case in the Hypostyle Hall at Karnak. But this structure, if it
existed, has entirely disappeared.[12]
[Illustration: FIG. 56a.--SECTION OF THE GREEK DORIC TEMPLE AT
PAESTUM. AS RESTORED BY BOeTTICHER.]
[Illustration: FIG. 57.--THE GREEK DORIC ORDER FROM THE THESEUM.]
The order of the Parthenon was Doric, and the leading proportions were
as follows:--The column was 5.56 diameters high; the whole height,
including the stylobate or steps, might be divided into nine parts, of
which two go to the stylobate, six to the column, and one to the
entablature.
[Illustration: FIG. 58.--PLAN OF A GREEK DORIC COLUMN.]
[Illustration: FIG. 59.--THE FILLETS UNDER A GREEK DORIC CAPITAL.]
The Greek Doric order is without a base; the shaft of the column
springs from the top step and tapers towards the top, the outline
being not, however, straight, but of a subtle curve, known technically
as the entasis of the column. This shaft is channelled with twenty
shallow channels,[13] the ridges separating one from another being
very fine lines. A little below the moulding of the capital, fine
sinkings, forming lines round the shaft, exist, and above these the
channels of the flutes are stopped by or near the commencement of the
projecting moulding of the capital. This moulding, which is of a
section calculated to convey the idea of powerful support, is called
the echinus, and its lower portion is encircled by a series of fillets
(Fig. 59), which are cut into it. Above the echinus, which is
circular, like the shaft, comes the highest member--the abacus, a
square stout slab of marble, which completes the capital of the
column. The whole is most skilfully designed to convey the idea of
sturdy support, and yet to clothe the support with grace. The strong
proportions of the shaft, the slight curve of its outline, the lines
traced upon its surface by the channels, and even the vigorous
uncompromising planting of it on the square step from which it
springs, all contribute to make the column look strong. The check
given to the vigorous upward lines of the channels on the shaft by the
first sinkings, and their arrest at the point where the capital
spreads out, intensified as it is by the series of horizontal lines
drawn round the echinus by the fillets cut into it, all seem to convey
the idea of spreading the supporting energy of the column outwards;
and the abacus appears naturally fitted, itself inert, to receive a
burden placed upon it and to transmit its pressure to the capital and
shaft below.
[Illustration: FIG. 60.--CAPITAL OF A GREEK DORIC COLUMN FROM AEGINA,
WITH COLOURED DECORATION.]
[Illustration: FIG. 61.--SECTION OF THE ENTABLATURE OF THE GREEK
DORIC ORDER.]
[Illustration: FIG. 62.--PLAN LOOKING UP OF PART OF A GREEK DORIC
PERISTYLE.]
The entablature which formed the superstructure consisted first of a
square marble beam--the architrave, which, it may be assumed,
represents a square timber beam that occupied the same position in
the primitive structures. On this rests a second member called the
frieze, the prominent feature of which is a series of slightly
projecting features, known as triglyphs (three channels) (Fig. 63),
from the channels running down their face. These closely resemble, and
no doubt actually represent, the ends of massive timber beams, which
must have connected the colonnade to the wall of the cell in earlier
buildings. At the bottom of each is a row of small pendants, known as
guttae, which closely resemble wooden pins, such as would be used to
keep a timber beam in place. The panels between the triglyphs are
usually as wide as they are high. They are termed metopes and
sculpture commonly occupies them. The third division of the
entablature, the cornice represents the overhanging eaves of the roof.
[Illustration: FIG. 63.--DETAILS OF THE TRIGLYPH.]
[Illustration: FIG. 64.--DETAILS OF THE MUTULES.]
The cornices employed in classic architecture may be almost invariably
subdivided into three parts: the supporting part, which is the
lowest,--the projecting part, which is the middle,--and the crowning
part, which is the highest division of the cornice. The supporting
part in a Greek Doric cornice is extremely small. There are no
mouldings, such as we shall find in almost every other cornice,
calculated to convey the idea of contributing to sustain the
projection of the cornice, but there are slabs of marble, called
mutules (Fig. 64), dropping towards the outer end, of which one is
placed over each triglyph and one between every two. These seem to
recall, by their shape, their position, and their slope alike, the
ends of the rafters of a timber roof; and their surface is covered
with small projections which resemble the heads of wooden pins,
similar to those already alluded to. The projecting part, in this as
in almost all cornices, is a plain upright face of some height, called
"the corona," and recalling probably a "facia" or flat narrow board
such as a carpenter of the present day would use in a similar
position, secured in the original structure to the ends of the rafters
and supporting the eaves. Lastly, the crowning part is, in the Greek
Doric, a single convex moulding, not very dissimilar in profile to the
ovolo of the capital, and forming what we commonly call an
eaves-gutter.
At the ends of the building the two upper divisions of the
cornice--namely, the projecting corona and the crowning ovolo--are
made to follow the sloping line of the gable, a second corona being
also carried across horizontally in a manner which can be best
understood by inspecting a diagram of the corner of a Greek Doric
building (Fig. 57); and the triangular space thus formed was termed a
pediment, and was the position in which the finest of the sculpture
with which the building was enriched was placed.
In the Parthenon a continuous band of sculpture ran round the exterior
of the cell, near the top of the wall.
One other feature was employed in Greek temple-architecture. The
_anta_ was a square pillar or pier of masonry attached to the wall,
and corresponded very closely to our pilaster; but its capital always
differed from that of the columns in the neighbourhood of which it was
employed. The antae of the Greek Doric order, as employed in the
Parthenon, have a moulded base, which it will be remembered is not the
case with the column, and their capital has for its principal feature
an under-cut moulding, known as the bird's beak, quite dissimilar from
the ovolo of the capital of the column (Fig. 65). Sometimes the
portico of a temple consisted of the side walls prolonged, and ending
in two antae, with two or more columns standing between them. Such a
portico is said to be in antis.
[Illustration: FIG. 65.--ELEVATION AND SECTION OF THE CAPITAL OF A
GREEK ANTA, WITH COLOURED DECORATION.]
The Parthenon presents examples of the most extraordinary refinements
in order to correct optical illusions. The delicacy and subtlety of
these are extreme, but there can be no manner of doubt that they
existed. The best known correction is the diminution in diameter or
taper, and the _entasis_ or convex curve of the tapered outline of the
shaft of the column. Without the taper, which is perceptible enough in
the order of this building, and much more marked in the order of
earlier buildings, the columns would look top-heavy; but the entasis
is an additional optical correction to prevent their outline from
appearing hollowed, which it would have done had there been no curve.
The columns of the Parthenon have shafts that are over 34 ft. high,
and diminish from a diameter of 6.15 ft. at the bottom to 4.81 ft. at
the top. The outline between these points is convex, but so slightly
so that the curve departs at the point of greatest curvature not more
than 3/4 in. from the straight line joining the top and bottom. This
is, however, just sufficient to correct the tendency to look hollow in
the middle.
A second correction is intended to overcome the apparent tendency of a
building to spread outwards towards the top. This is met by inclining
the columns slightly inwards. So slight, however, is the inclination,
that were the axes of two columns on opposite sides of the Parthenon
continued upwards till they met, the meeting-point would be 1952
yards, or, in other words, more than one mile from the ground.
Another optical correction is applied to the horizontal lines. In
order to overcome a tendency which exists in all long lines to seem as
though they droop in the middle, the lines of the architrave, of the
top step, and of other horizontal features of the building, are all
slightly curved. The difference between the outline of the top step of
the Parthenon and a straight line joining its two ends is at the
greatest only just over 2 inches.
The last correction which it is necessary to name here was applied to
the vertical proportions of the building. The principles upon which
this correction rests have been demonstrated by Mr. John
Pennethorne;[14] and it would hardly come within the scope of this
volume to attempt to state them here: suffice it to say, that small
additions, amounting in the entire height of the order to less than 5
inches, were made to the heights of the various members of the order,
with a view to secure that from one definite point of view the effect
of foreshortening should be exactly compensated, and so the building
should appear to the spectator to be perfectly proportioned.
The Parthenon, like many, if not all Greek buildings, was profusely
decorated with coloured ornaments, of which nearly every trace has now
disappeared, but which must have contributed largely to the splendid
beauty of the building as a whole, and must have emphasised and set
off its parts. The ornaments known as Doric frets were largely
employed. They consist of patterns made entirely of straight lines
interlacing, and, while preserving the severity which is
characteristic of the style, they permit of the introduction of
considerable richness.
The principal remaining examples or fragments of Greek Doric may be
enumerated as follows:--
IN GREECE.
Temple of (?) Athena, at Corinth, ab. 650 B.C.
Temple of (?) Zeus, in the island of AEgina, ab. 550 B.C.
Temple of Theseus (Theseum), at Athens, 465 B.C.
Temple of Athena (Parthenon), on the Acropolis at Athens, fin. 438 B.C.
The Propylaea, on the Acropolis at Athens, 436-431 B.C.
Temple of Zeus at Olympia.
Temple of Apollo Epicurius, at Bassae,[15] in Arcadia (designed by
Ictinus).
Temple of Apollo Epicurius, at Phigaleia, in Arcadia (built by
Ictinus).
Temple of Athena, on the rock of Sunium, in Attica.
Temple of Nemesis, at Rhamnus, in Attica.
Temple of Demeter (Ceres), at Eleusis, in Attica.
IN SICILY AND SOUTH ITALY.
Temple of (?) Zeus, at Agrigentum, in Sicily (begun B.C. 480).
Temple at AEgesta (or Segesta), in Sicily.
Temple of (?) Zeus, at Selinus, in Sicily (? ab. 410 B.C.).
Temple of (?) Athena, at Syracuse, in Sicily.
Temple of Poseidon, at Paestum, in South of Italy (? ab. 550 B.C.).
FOOTNOTES:
[10] See Frontispiece and Figs. 54 and 55.
[11] The Propylaea.
[12] Mr. Fergusson's investigations, soon, it is understood, to be
published in a complete form, clearly show that the clerestory and
roof can be restored with the greatest probability.
[13] In a few instances a smaller number is found.
[14] 'Geometry and Optics of Ancient Architecture.'
[15] ? Exterior Doric--Interior Ionic.
[Illustration: FIG. 66.--PALMETTE AND HONEYSUCKLE.]
CHAPTER VI.
GREEK ARCHITECTURE.
_Buildings of the Ionic and Corinthian Orders._
The Doric was the order in which the full strength and the complete
refinement of the artistic character of the Greeks were most
completely shown. There was a great deal of the spirit of severe
dignity proper to Egyptian art in its aspect; but other nationalities
contributed to the formation of the many-sided Greek nature, and we
must look to some other country than Egypt for the spirit which
inspired the Ionic order. This seems to have been brought into Greece
by a distinct race, and shows marks of an Asiatic origin. The feature
which is most distinctive is the one most distinctly Eastern--the
capital of the column, ornamented always by volutes, _i.e._ scrolls,
which bear a close resemblance to features similarly employed in the
columns found at Persepolis. The same resemblance can be also detected
in the moulded bases, and even the shafts of the columns, and in many
of the ornaments employed throughout the buildings.
[Illustration: FIG. 67.--SHAFT OF IONIC COLUMN SHOWING THE FLUTES.]
[Illustration: FIG. 68.--IONIC CAPITAL. FRONT ELEVATION.]
[Illustration: FIG. 69.--IONIC CAPITAL. SIDE ELEVATION.]
In form and disposition an ordinary Ionic temple was similar to one of
the Doric order, but the general proportions are more slender, and the
mouldings of the order are more numerous and more profusely enriched.
The column in the Ionic order had a base, often elaborately and
sometimes singularly moulded (Figs. 74, 75). The shaft (Figs. 67, 70)
is of more slender proportions than the Doric shaft. It was fluted,
but its channels are more numerous, and are separated from one another
by broader fillets than in the Doric. The distinctive feature, as in
all the orders, is the capital (Figs. 68, 69), which is recognised at
a glance by the two remarkable ornaments already alluded to as like
scrolls, and known as volutes. These generally formed the faces of a
pair of cushion-shaped features, which could be seen in a side view of
the capital; but sometimes volutes stand in a diagonal position, and
in almost every building they differ slightly. The abacus is less deep
than in the Greek Doric, and it is always moulded at the edge, which
was never the case with the Doric abacus. The entablature (Fig. 70)
is, generally speaking, richer than that of the Doric order. The
architrave, for example, has three facias instead of being plain. On
the other hand, the frieze has no triglyphs, and but rarely sculpture.
There are more members in the cornice, several mouldings being
combined to fortify the supporting portion. These have sometimes been
termed "the bed mouldings," and among them occurs one which is almost
typical of the order, and is termed a dentil band. This moulding
presents the appearance of a plain square band of stone, in which a
series of cuts had been made dividing it into blocks somewhat
resembling teeth, whence the name. Such an ornament is more naturally
constructed in wood than in stone or marble, but if the real
derivation of the Ionic order, as of the Doric, be in fact from timber
structures, the dentil band is apparently the only feature in which
that origin can now be traced. The crowning member of the cornice is a
partly hollow moulding, technically called a "cyma recta," less
vigorous than the convex ovolo, of the Doric: this moulding, and some
of the bed mouldings, were commonly enriched with carving. Altogether
more slenderness and less vigour, more carved enrichment and less
painted decoration, more reliance on architectural ornament and
less on the work of the sculptor, appear to distinguish those examples
of Greek Ionic which have come down to us, as compared with Doric
buildings.
[Illustration: FIG. 70.--THE IONIC ORDER. FROM PRIENE, ASIA MINOR.]
[Illustration: FIG. 71.--IONIC ORDER. FROM THE ERECHTHEIUM, ATHENS.]
[Illustration: FIG. 72.--NORTH-WEST VIEW OF THE ERECHTHEIUM, IN THE
TIME OF PERICLES.]
The most numerous examples of the Ionic order of which remains exist
are found in Asia Minor, but the most refined and complete is the
Erechtheium at Athens (Figs. 72, 73), a composite structure containing
three temples built in juxtaposition, but differing from one another
in scale, levels, dimensions, and treatment. The principal order from
the Erechtheium (Fig. 71) shows a large amount of enrichment
introduced with the most refined and severe taste. Specially
remarkable are the ornaments (borrowed from the Assyrian honeysuckle)
which encircle the upper part of the shaft at the point where it
passes into the capital, and the splendid spirals of the volutes
(Figs. 68, 69). The bases of the columns in the Erechtheium example
are models of elegance and beauty. Those of some of the examples from
Asia Minor are overloaded with a vast number of mouldings, by no
means always producing a pleasing effect (Figs. 74, 75). Some of them
bear a close resemblance to the bases of the columns at Persepolis.
[Illustration: FIG. 73.--PLAN OF THE ERECHTHEIUM.]
[Illustration: FIG. 74.--IONIC BASE FROM THE TEMPLE OF THE WINGLESS
VICTORY (NIKE APTEROS).]
[Illustration: FIG. 75.--IONIC BASE MOULDINGS FROM PRIENE.]
The most famous Greek building which was erected in the Ionic style
was the Temple of Diana at Ephesus. This temple has been all but
totally destroyed, and the very site of it had been for centuries lost
and unknown till the energy and sagacity of an English architect (Mr.
Wood) enabled him to discover and dig out the vestiges of the
building. Fortunately sufficient traces of the foundation have
remained to render it possible to recover the plan of the temple
completely; and the discovery of fragments of the order, together with
representations on ancient coins and a description by Pliny, have
rendered it possible to make a restoration on paper, of the general
appearance of this famous temple, which must be very nearly, if not
absolutely, correct.
The walls of this temple enclosed, as usual, a cella (in which was the
statue of the goddess), with apparently a treasury behind it: they
were entirely surrounded by a double series of columns, with a
pediment at each end. The exterior of the building, including these
columns, was about twice the width of the cella. The whole structure,
which was of marble, was planted on a spacious platform with steps.
The account of Pliny refers to thirty-six columns, which he describes
as "_columnae celatae_" (sculptured columns), adding that one was by
Scopas, a very celebrated artist. The fortunate discovery by Mr. Wood
of a few fragments of these columns shows that the lower part of the
shaft immediately above the base was enriched by a group of
figures--about life-size--carved in the boldest relief and encircling
the column. One of these groups has been brought to the British
Museum, and its beauty and vigour enable the imagination partly to
restore this splendid feature, which certainly was one of the most
sumptuous modes of decorating a building by the aid of sculpture which
has ever been attempted; and the effect must have been rich beyond
description.
It is worth remark that the Erechtheium, which has been already
referred to, contains an example of a different, and perhaps a not
less remarkable, mode of combining sculpture with architecture. In one
of its three porticoes (Fig. 72) the columns are replaced by standing
female figures, known as caryatidae, and the entablature rests on their
heads. This device has frequently been repeated in ancient and in
modern architecture, but, except in some comparatively obscure
examples, the sculptured columns of Ephesus do not appear to have been
imitated.
Another famous Greek work of art, the remains of which have been, like
the Temple of Diana, disinterred by the energy and skill of a learned
Englishman, belonged to the Ionic order. To Mr. Newton we owe the
recovery of the site, and considerable fragments of the architectural
features, of the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus, one of the ancient
wonders of the world. The general outline of this monument must have
resembled other Greek tombs which have been preserved, such, for
example, as the Lion Tomb at Cnidus; that is to say, the plan was
square: there was a basement, above this an order, and above that a
steep pyramidal roof rising in steps, not carried to a point, but
stopping short to form a platform, on which was placed a quadriga (or
four-horsed chariot). This building is known to have been richly
sculptured, and many fragments of great beauty have been recovered.
Indeed it was probably its elaboration, as well as its very unusual
height (for the Greek buildings were seldom lofty), which led to its
being so celebrated.
[Illustration: FIG. 76.--THE CORINTHIAN ORDER. FROM THE MONUMENT OF
LYSICRATES AT ATHENS.]
[Illustration: FIG. 77.--CORINTHIAN CAPITAL FROM THE MONUMENT OF
LYSICRATES AT ATHENS.]
The Corinthian order, the last to make its appearance, was almost as
much Roman as Greek, and is hardly found in any of the great temples
of the best period of which remains exist in Greece, though we hear of
its use. For example, Pausanias states that the Corinthian order was
employed in the interior of the Temple of Athena Alea at Tegea, built
by Scopas, to which a date shortly after the year 394 B.C. is
assigned. The examples which we possess are comparatively small works,
and in them the order resembles the Ionic, but with the important
exceptions that the capital of the column is quite different, that the
proportions are altogether a little slenderer, and that the
enrichments are somewhat more florid.
[Illustration: FIG. 78.--MONUMENT OF LYSICRATES AT ATHENS, AS IN THE
TIME OF PERICLES.]
The capital of the Greek Corinthian order, as seen in the Choragic
Monument of Lysicrates at Athens (Fig. 78)--a comparatively miniature
example, but the most perfect we have--is a work of art of marvellous
beauty (Fig. 77). It retains a feature resembling the Ionic volute,
but reduced to a very small size, set obliquely and appearing to
spring from the sides of a kind of long bell-shaped termination to the
column. This bell is clothed with foliage, symmetrically arranged and
much of it studied, but in a conventional manner, from the graceful
foliage of the acanthus; between the two small volutes appears an
Assyrian honeysuckle, and tendrils of honeysuckle, conventionally
treated, occupy part of the upper portion of the capital. The abacus
is moulded, and is curved on plan, and the base of the capital is
marked by a very unusual turning-down of the flutes of the columns.
The entire structure to which this belonged is a model of elegance,
and the large sculptured mass of leaves and tendrils with which it is
crowned is especially noteworthy.
[Illustration: FIG. 79.--CAPITAL OF ANTAE FROM MILETUS. SIDE VIEW.]
A somewhat simpler Corinthian capital, and another of very rich
design, are found in the Temple of Apollo Didymaeus at Miletus, where
also a very elegant capital for the antae--or pilasters--is employed
(Figs. 79, 81). A more ornamental design for a capital could hardly be
adopted than that of the Lysicrates example, but there was room for
more elaboration in the entablature, and accordingly large
richly-sculptured brackets seem to have been introduced, and a
profusion of ornament was employed. The examples of this treatment
which remain are, however, of Roman origin rather than Greek.
[Illustration: FIG. 80.--RESTORATION OF THE GREEK THEATRE OF
SEGESTA.]
The Greek cities must have included structures of great beauty and
adapted to many purposes, of which in most cases few traces, if any,
have been preserved. We have no remains of a Greek palace, or of Greek
dwelling-houses, although those at Pompeii were probably erected and
decorated by Greek artificers, for Roman occupation. The agora of a
Greek city, which was a place of public assembly something like the
Roman Forum, is known to us only by descriptions in ancient writers,
but we possess some remains of Greek theatres; and from these, aided
by Roman examples and written descriptions, can understand what these
buildings were. The auditory was curved in plan, occupying rather more
than a semicircle; the seats rose in tiers one behind another; a
circular space was reserved for the chorus in the centre of the seats,
and behind it was a raised stage, bounded by a wall forming its back
and sides: a rough notion of the arrangement can be obtained from the
lecture theatre of many modern colleges, and our illustration (Fig.
80) gives a general idea of what must have been the appearance of one
of these structures. Much of the detail of these buildings is,
however, a matter of pure speculation, and consequently does not enter
into the scheme of this manual.
[Illustration: FIG. 81.--CAPITAL OF ANTAE FROM MILETUS.]
CHAPTER VII.
GREEK ARCHITECTURE.
_Analysis._
The _Plan_ or floor-disposition of a Greek building was always simple
however great its extent, was well judged for effect, and capable of
being understood at once. The grandest results were obtained by simple
means, and all confusion, uncertainty, or complication were
scrupulously avoided. Refined precision, order, symmetry, and
exactness mark the plan as well as every part of the work.
The plan of a Greek temple may be said to present many of the same
elements as that of an Egyptian temple, but, so to speak, turned
inside out. Columns are relied on by the Greek artist, as they were by
the Egyptian artist, as a means of giving effect; but they are placed
by him outside the building instead of within its courts and halls.
The Greek, starting with a comparatively small nucleus formed by the
cell and the treasury, encircles them by a magnificent girdle of
pillars, and so makes a grand structure, the first hint or suggestion
being in all probability to be found in certain small Egyptian
buildings to which reference has already been made. The disposition of
these columns and of the great range of steps, or stylobate, is the
most marked feature in Greek temple plans. Columns also existed, it is
true, in the interior of the building, but these were of smaller size,
and seem to have been introduced to aid in carrying the roof and the
clerestory, if there was one. They have in several instances
disappeared, and there is certainly no ground for supposing that in
any Greek interior the grand but oppressive effect of a hypostyle hall
was attempted to be reproduced. That was abandoned, together with the
complication, seclusion, and gloom of the long series of chambers,
cells, &c., placed one behind another, just as the contrasts and
surprises of the series of courts and halls following in succession
were abandoned for the one simple but grand mass built to be seen from
without rather than from within. In the greater number of Greek
buildings a degree of precision is exhibited, to which the Egyptians
did not attain. All right angles are absolutely true; the setting-out
(or spacing) of the different columns, piers, openings, &c., is
perfectly exact; and, in the Parthenon, the patient investigations of
Mr. Penrose and other skilled observers have disclosed a degree of
accuracy as well as refinement which resembles the precision with
which astronomical instruments are adjusted in Europe at the present
day, rather than the rough-and-ready measurements of a modern mason or
bricklayer.
What the plans of Greek palaces might have exhibited, did any remains
exist, is merely matter for inference and conjecture, and it is not
proposed in this volume to pass far beyond ascertained and observed
facts. There can be, however, little doubt that the palaces of the
West Asiatic style must have at least contributed suggestions as to
internal disposition of the later and more magnificent Greek mansions.
The ordinary dwelling-houses of citizens, as described by ancient
writers, resembled those now visible in the disinterred cities of
Pompeii and Herculaneum, which will be referred to under Roman
Architecture.[16] The chief characteristic of the plan of these is
that they retain the disposition which in the temples was discarded;
that is to say, all the doors and windows looked into an inner court,
and the house was as far as possible secluded within an encircling
wall. The contrast between the openness of the public life led by the
men in Greek cities, and the seclusion of the women and the families
when at home, is remarkably illustrated by this difference between the
public and private buildings.
The plan of the triple building called the Erechtheium (Fig. 72)
deserves special mention, as an example of an exceptional arrangement
which appears to set the ordinary laws of symmetry at defiance, and
which is calculated to produce a result into which the picturesque
enters at least as much as the beautiful. Though the central temple is
symmetrical, the two attached porticoes are not so, and do not, in
position, dimensions, or treatment, balance one another. The result is
a charming group, and we cannot doubt that other examples of freedom
of planning would have been found, had more remains of the
architecture of the great cities of Greece come down to our own day.
In public buildings other than temples--such as the theatre, the
agora, and the basilica--the Greek architects seem to have had great
scope for their genius; the planning of the theatres shows skilful and
thoroughly complete provisions to meet the requirements of the case. A
circular disposition was here introduced--not, it is true, for the
first time, since it is rendered probable by the representations on
sculptured slabs that some circular buildings existed in Assyria, and
circular buildings remain in the archaic works at Mycenae; but it was
now elaborated with remarkable completeness, beauty, and mastery over
all the difficulties involved. Could we see the great theatre of
Athens as it was when perfect, we should probably find that as an
interior it was almost unrivalled, alike for convenience and for
beauty; and for these excellences it was mainly indebted to the
elegance of its planning. The actual floor of many of the Greek
temples appears to have been of marble of different colours.
_The Walls._
The construction of the walls of the Greek temples rivalled that of
the Egyptians in accuracy and beauty of workmanship, and resembled
them in the use of solid materials. The Greeks had within reach
quarries of marble, the most beautiful material which nature has
provided for the use of the builder; and great fineness of surface and
high finish were attained. Some interesting examples of hollow walling
occur in the construction of the Parthenon. The wall was not an
element of the building on which the Greek architect seemed to dwell
with pleasure; much of it is almost invariably overshadowed by the
lines of columns which form the main features of the building.
The pediment (or gable) of a temple is a grand development of the
walls, and perhaps the most striking of the additions which the Greeks
made to the resources of the architect. It offers a fine field for
sculpture, and adds real and apparent height beyond anything that the
Egyptians ever attempted since the days of the Pyramid-builders; and
it has remained in constant use to the present hour.
We do not hear of towers being attached to buildings, and, although
such monumental structures as the Mausoleum of Halicarnassus
approached the proportions of a tower, height does not seem to have
commended itself to the mind of the Greek architect as necessary to
the buildings which he designed. It was reserved for Roman and
Christian art to introduce this element of architectural effect in all
its power. On the other hand, the Greek, like the Persian architect,
emphasised the base of his building in a remarkable manner, not only
by base mouldings, but by planting the whole structure on a great
range of steps which formed an essential part of the composition.
_The Roof._
The construction of the roofs of Greek temples has been the subject of
much debate. It is almost certain that they were in some way so made
as to admit light. They were framed of timber and covered by tiles,
often, if not always, of marble. Although all traces of the timber
framing have disappeared, we can at least know that the pitch was not
steep, by the slope of the outline of the pediments, which formed, as
has already been said, perhaps the chief glory of a Greek temple. The
flat stone roofs sometimes used by the Egyptians, and necessitating
the placing of columns or other supports close together, seem to have
become disused, with the exception that where a temple was surrounded
by a range of columns the space between the main wall and the columns
was so covered.
The vaulted stone roofs of the archaic buildings, of which the
treasury of Atreus (Figs. 52, 52a) was the type, do not seem to have
prevailed in a later period, or, so far as we know, to have been
succeeded by any similar covering or vault of a more scientific
construction.
It is hardly necessary to add that the Greek theatres were not roofed.
The Romans shaded the spectators in their theatres and amphitheatres
by means of a velarium or awning, but it is extremely doubtful whether
even this expedient was in use in Greek theatres.
_The Openings._
The most important characteristic of the openings in Greek buildings
is that they were flat-topped,--covered by a lintel of stone or
marble,--and never arched. We have already[17] shown that this
circumstance is really of the first importance as determining the
architectural character of buildings. Doors and window openings were
often a little narrower at the top than the bottom, and were marked by
a band of mouldings, known as the architrave, on the face of the wall,
and, so to speak, framing in the opening. There was often also a small
cornice over each (Figs. 82, 83). Openings were seldom advanced into
prominence or employed as features in the exterior of a building; in
fact, the same effects which windows produce in other styles were in
Greek buildings created by the interspaces between the columns.
_The Columns._
These features, together with the superstructure or entablature, which
they customarily carried, were the prominent parts of Greek
architecture, occupying as they did the entire height of the building.
The development of the orders (which we have explained to be really
decorative systems, each of which involved the use of one sort of
column, though the term is constantly understood as meaning merely the
column and entablature) is a very interesting subject, and illustrates
the acuteness with which the Greeks selected from those models which
were accessible to them, exactly what was suited to their purpose, and
the skill with which they altered and refined, and almost redesigned,
everything which they so selected.
[Illustration: FIG. 82.--GREEK DOORWAY SHOWING CORNICE.]
[Illustration: FIG. 83.--GREEK DOORWAY. FRONT VIEW. (FROM THE
ERECHTHEIUM.)]
During the whole period when Greek art was being developed, the
ancient and polished civilisation of Egypt constituted a most
powerful and most stable influence, always present,--always,
comparatively speaking, within reach,--and always the same. Of all the
forms of column and capital existing in Egypt, the Greeks, however,
only selected that straight-sided fluted type of which the Beni-Hassan
example is the best known, but by no means the only instance. We first
meet with these fluted columns at Corinth, of very sturdy proportions,
and having a wide, swelling, clumsy moulding under the abacus by way
of a capital. By degrees the proportions of the shaft grew more
slender, and the profile of the capital more elegant and less bold,
till the perfected perfections of the Greek Doric column were
attained. This column is the original to which all columns with
moulded capitals that have been used in architecture, from the age of
Pericles to our own, may be directly or indirectly referred; while the
Egyptian types which the Greeks did not select--such, for example, as
the lotus-columns at Karnak--have never been perpetuated.
A different temper or taste, and partly a different history, led to
the selection of the West Asiatic types of column by a section of the
Greek people; but great alterations in proportion, in the treatment of
the capital, and in the management of the moulded base from which the
columns sprang, were made, even in the orders which occur in the Ionic
buildings of Asia Minor. This was carried further when the Ionic order
was made use of in Athens herself, and as a result the Attic base and
the perfected Ionic capital are to be found at their best in the
Erechtheium example. The Ionic order and the Corinthian, which soon
followed it, are the parents,--not, it is true, of all, but of the
greater part of the columns with foliated capitals that have been used
in all styles and periods of architecture since. It will not be
forgotten that rude types of both orders are found represented on
Assyrian bas-reliefs, but still the Corinthian capital and order must
be considered as the natural and, so to speak, inevitable development
of the Ionic. From the Corinthian capital an unbroken series of
foliated capitals can be traced down to our own day; almost the only
new ornamented type ever devised since being that which takes its
origin in the Romanesque block capital, known to us in England as the
early Norman cushion capital: this was certainly the parent of a
distinct series, though even these owe not a little to Greek
originals.
We have alluded to the Ionic base. It was derived from a very tall one
in use at Persepolis, and we meet with it first in the rich but clumsy
forms of the bases in the Asia Minor examples. In them we find the
height of the feature as used in Persia compressed, while great, and
to our eyes eccentric, elaboration marked the mouldings: these the
refinement of Attic taste afterwards simplified, till the profile of
the well-known Attic base was produced--a base which has had as wide
and lasting an influence as either of the original forms of capital.
The Corinthian order, as has been above remarked, is the natural
sequel of the Ionic. Had Greek architecture continued till it fell
into decadence, this order would have been the badge of it. As it was,
the decadence of Greek art was Roman art, and the Corinthian order was
the favourite order of the Romans; in fact all the important examples
of it which remain are Roman work.
If we remember how invariably use was made of one or other of the two
great types of the Greek order in all the buildings of the best Greek
time, with the addition towards its close of the Corinthian order, and
that these orders, a little more subdivided and a good deal modified,
have formed the substratum of Roman architecture and of that in use
during the last three centuries; and if we also bear in mind that
nearly all the columnar architecture of Early Christian, Byzantine,
Saracenic, and Gothic times, owes its forms to the same great source,
we may well admit that the invention and perfecting of the orders of
Greek architecture has been--with one exception--the most important
event in the architectural history of the world. That exception is, of
course, the introduction of the Arch.
_The Ornaments._
Greek Ornaments have exerted the same wide influence over the whole
course of Western art as Greek columns; and in their origin they are
equally interesting as specimens of Greek skill in adapting existing
types, and of Greek invention where no existing types would serve.
Few of the mouldings of Greek architecture are to be traced to
anterior styles. There is nothing like them in Egyptian work, and
little or nothing in Assyrian; and though a suggestion of some of them
may no doubt be found in Persian examples, we must take them as having
been substantially originated by Greek genius, which felt that they
were wanted, designed them, and brought them far towards absolute
perfection. They were of the most refined form, and when enriched were
carved with consummate skill. They were executed, it must be
remembered, in white marble,--a material having the finest surface,
and capable of responding to the most delicate variations in contour
by corresponding changes in shade or light in a manner and to a degree
which no other material can equal. In the Doric, mouldings were few,
and almost always convex; they became much more numerous in the later
styles, and then included many of concave profile. The chief are the
OVOLO, which formed the curved part of the Doric capital, and the
crowning moulding of the Doric cornice; the CYMA; the BIRD'S BEAK,
employed in the capitals of the antae; the FILLETS under the Doric
capital; the hollows and TORUS mouldings of the Ionic and Corinthian
bases.
The profiles of these mouldings were very rarely segments of circles,
but lines of varying curvature, capable of producing the most delicate
changes of light and shade, and contours of the most subtle grace.
Many of them correspond to conic sections, but it seems probable that
the outlines were drawn by hand, and not obtained by any mechanical or
mathematical method.
The mouldings were some of them enriched, to use the technical word,
by having such ornaments cut into them or carved on them as, though
simple in form, lent themselves well to repetition.[18] Where more
room for ornament existed, and especially in the capitals of the Ionic
and Corinthian orders, ornaments were freely and most gracefully
carved, and very symmetrically arranged. Though these were very
various, yet most of them can be classed under three heads. (1.) FRETS
(Figs. 116 to 120). These were patterns made up of squares or L-shaped
lines interlaced and made to seem intricate, though originally simple.
Frequently these patterns are called Doric frets, from their having
been most used in buildings of the Doric order. (2.) HONEYSUCKLE
(Figs. 94 and 111 to 114). This ornament, admirably conventionalised,
had been used freely by the Assyrians, and the Greeks only adopted
what they found ready to their hand when they began to use it; but
they refined it, at the same time losing no whit of its vigour or
effectiveness, and the honeysuckle has come to be known as a typical
Greek decorative _motif_. (3.) ACANTHUS (Figs. 84 and 85). This is a
broad-leaved plant, the foliage and stems of which, treated in a
conventional manner, though with but little departure from nature,
were found admirably adapted for floral decorative work, and
accordingly were made use of in the foliage of the Corinthian capital,
and in such ornaments as, for example, the great finial which forms
the summit of the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates.
[Illustration: FIG. 84.--THE ACANTHUS LEAF AND STALK.]
The beauty of the carving was, however, eclipsed by that highest of
all ornaments--sculpture. In the Doric temples, as, for example, in
the Parthenon, the architect contented himself with providing suitable
spaces for the sculptor to occupy; and thus the great pediments, the
metopes (Fig. 86) or square panels, and the frieze of the Parthenon
were occupied by sculpture, in which there was no necessity for more
conventionalism than the amount of artificial arrangement needed in
order fitly to occupy spaces that were respectively triangular,
square, or continuous. In the later and more voluptuous style of the
Ionic temples we find sculpture made into an architectural feature, as
in the famous statues, known as the Caryatides, which support the
smallest portico of the Erechtheium, and in the enriched columns of
the Temple of Diana at Ephesus. Sculpture had already been so employed
in Egypt, and was often so used in later times; but the best
opportunity for the display of the finest qualities of the sculptor's
art is such an one as the pediments, &c., of the great Doric temples
afforded.
[Illustration: FIG. 85.--THE ACANTHUS LEAF.]
There is little room for doubting that all the Greek temples were
richly decorated in colours, but traces and indications are all that
remain: these, however, are sufficient to prove that a very large
amount of colour was employed, and that probably ornaments (Figs. 105
to 120) were painted upon many of those surfaces which were left plain
by the mason, especially on the cornices, and that mosaics (Fig. 87)
and coloured marbles, and even gilding, were freely used. There is
also ground for believing that as the use of carved enrichments
increased with the increasing adoption of the Ionic and Corinthian
styles, less use was made of painted decorations.
_Architectural Character._
Observations which have been made during the course of this and the
previous chapters will have gone far to point out the characteristics
of Greek art. An archaic and almost forbidding severity, with heavy
proportions and more strength than grace, marks the earliest Greek
buildings of which we have any fragments remaining. Dignity, sobriety,
refinement, and beauty are the qualities of the works of the best
period. The latest buildings were more rich, more ornate, and more
slender in their proportions and to a certain extent less severe.
[Illustration: FIG. 86.--METOPE FROM THE PARTHENON. CONFLICT BETWEEN
A CENTAUR AND ONE OF THE LAPITHAE.]
[Illustration: FIG. 87.--MOSAIC FROM THE TEMPLE OF ZEUS, OLYMPIA.]
Most carefully studied proportions prevailed, and were wrought out to
a pitch of completeness and refinement which is truly astounding.
Symmetry was the all but invariable law of composition. Yet in certain
respects--as, for example, the spacing and position of the columns--a
degree of freedom was enjoyed which Roman architecture did not
possess. Repetition ruled to the almost entire suppression of variety.
Disclosure of the arrangement and construction of the building was
almost complete, and hardly a trace of concealment can be detected.
Simplicity reigns in the earliest examples; the elaboration of even
the most ornamental is very chaste and graceful; and the whole effect
of Greek architecture is one of harmony, unity, and refined power.
[Illustration: EXAMPLES OF GREEK ORNAMENT
IN THE NORTHERN PORTICO OF THE ERECHTHEIUM--SHOWING THE
ORNAMENTATION OF THE CEILING.
FIG. 88.--SECTION OF THE PORTICO OF THE ERECHTHEIUM.
FIG. 89.--PLAN OF THE PORTICO--LOOKING UP.]
A general principle seldom pointed out which governs the application
of enrichments to mouldings in Greek architecture may be cited as a
good instance of the subtle yet admirable concord which existed
between the different features: it is as follows. _The outline of each
enrichment in relief was ordinarily described by the same line as the
profile of the moulding to which it was applied._ The egg enrichment
(Fig. 91) on the ovolo, the water-leaf on the cyma reversa (Figs. 92
and 97), the honeysuckle on the cyma recta (Fig. 94), and the
guilloche (Fig. 100) on the torus, are examples of the application of
this rule,--one which obviously tends to produce harmony.
[Illustration: FIG. 90.--CAPITAL OF ANTAE FROM THE ERECHTHEIUM.]
[Illustration: EXAMPLES OF GREEK ORNAMENT IN RELIEF.
FIG. 91.--EGG AND DART.
FIG. 92.--LEAF AND DART.
FIG. 93.--HONEYSUCKLE.
FIG. 94.--HONEYSUCKLE.
FIG. 95.--ACANTHUS.
FIG. 96.--ACANTHUS.
FIG. 97.--LEAF AND TONGUE.
FIG. 98.--LEAF AND TONGUE.
FIG. 99.--GARLAND.
FIG. 100.--GUILLOCHE.
FIG. 101.--BEAD AND FILLET.
FIG. 102.--BEAD AND FILLET.
FIG. 103.--TORUS MOULDING.
FIG. 104.--TORUS MOULDING.]
[Illustration: EXAMPLES OF GREEK ORNAMENT IN COLOUR.
FIG. 105.--HONEYSUCKLE.
FIGS. 106, 108.--FACIAS WITH BANDS OF FOLIAGE.
FIG. 106.
FIG. 107.--HONEYSUCKLE.
FIG. 108.
FIG. 109.--LEAF AND DART.
FIG. 110.--EGG AND DART.
FIGS. 111 TO 113.--EXAMPLES OF THE HONEYSUCKLE.
FIG. 111.
FIG. 112.
FIG. 113.
FIG. 114.--COMBINATION OF THE FRET, THE EGG AND DART, THE BEAD
AND FILLET, AND THE HONEYSUCKLE.
FIG. 114.
FIG. 115.--GUILLOCHE.
FIGS. 116 TO 120.--EXAMPLES OF THE FRET.
FIG. 116.
FIG. 117.
FIG. 118.
FIG. 119.
FIG. 120.]
FOOTNOTES:
[16] See Chap. IX.
[17] Chap. I.
[18] For a statement of the general rule governing such enrichments,
see page 133.
[Illustration: FIG. 121.--ELEVATION OF AN ETRUSCAN TEMPLE (RESTORED
FROM DESCRIPTIONS ONLY).]
CHAPTER VIII.
ETRUSCAN AND ROMAN ARCHITECTURE.
_Historical and General Sketch._
The few grains of truth that we are able to sift from the mass of
legend which has accumulated round the early history of Rome seem to
indicate that at a very early period--which the generally received
date of 753 B.C. may be taken to fix as nearly as is now possible--a
small band of outcasts and marauders settled themselves on the
Palatine Hill and commenced to carry on depredations against the
various cities of the tribes whose territories were in the immediate
neighbourhood, such as the Umbrians, Sabines, Samnites, Latins, and
Etruscans. A walled city was built, which from its admirable situation
succeeded in attracting inhabitants in considerable numbers, and
speedily began to exercise supremacy over its neighbours. The most
important of the neighbouring nations were the Etruscans, who called
themselves Rasena, and who must have settled on the west coast of
Italy, between the rivers Arno and Tiber, at a very early period.
Their origin is, however, very obscure, some authorities believing,
upon apparently good grounds, that they came from Asia Minor, while
others assert that they descended from the north over the Rhaetian
Alps. But whatever that origin may have been, they had at the time of
the founding of Rome as a city attained a high degree of civilisation,
and showed a considerable amount of architectural skill; and their
arts exercised a very great influence upon Roman art.
Considerable remains of the city walls of several Etruscan towns still
exist. These show that the masonry was of what has been termed a
Cyclopean character,--that is to say, the separate stones were of an
enormous size; in the majority of examples these stones were of a
polygonal shape, though in a few instances they were rectangular,
while in all cases they were fitted together with the most consummate
accuracy of workmanship, which, together with their great massiveness,
has enabled much of this masonry to endure to the present day.
Cortona, Volterra, Fiesole, and other towns exhibit instances of this
walling. The temples, palaces, or dwelling-houses which went to make
up the cities so fortified have all disappeared, and the only existing
structural remains of Etruscan buildings are tombs. These are found in
large numbers, and consist--as in the earlier instances which have
already been described--both of rock-cut and detached erections. Of
the former, the best known group is at Castel d'Asso, where we find
not only chambers cut into the rock, each resembling an ordinary room
with an entrance in the face of the rock, but also monuments cut
completely out and standing clear all round; and we cannot fail to
detect in the forms into which the rock has been cut, especially those
of the roof, imitations of wooden buildings, heavy square piers being
left at intervals supporting longitudinal beams which hold up the
roof. Fig. 122 is an illustration of the interior of a chamber in the
rock. Occasionally there were a cornice and pediment over the
entrance.
[Illustration: FIG. 122.--SEPULCHRE AT CORNETO.]
The other class of tombs are circular tumuli, similar to the Pelasgic
tombs of Asia Minor; of these large numbers exist, but not
sufficiently uninjured to enable us to restore them completely. They
generally consisted of a substructure of stone, upon which was raised
a conical elevation. In the case of the Regulini Galeassi tomb there
were an inner and an outer tumulus, the latter of which covered
several small tombs, while the inner enclosed one only, which had
fortunately never been opened till it was lately discovered. This tomb
was vaulted on the horizontal system--that is to say, its vault was
not a true arch, but was formed of courses of masonry, each
overhanging the one below, as in the Treasury of Atreus, and it had a
curious recess in the roof, in which were found numerous interesting
examples of Etruscan pottery. It is, however, clear from the city
gates, sewers, aqueducts, &c., that the Etruscans were acquainted with
and extensively used the true radiating arch composed of wedge-shaped
stones (voussoirs), and that they constructed it with great care and
scientific skill. The gate at Perugia, and the Cloacae or Sewers at
Rome, constructed during the reign of the Tarquins,[19] at the
beginning of the sixth century B.C., are examples of the true arch,
and this makes it certain that it was from the Etruscans that the
Romans learned the arched construction which, when combined with the
trabeated or lintel mode of construction which they copied from the
Greeks, formed the chief characteristic of Roman architecture. The
Cloaca Maxima (Fig. 123), which is roofed over with three concentric
semicircular rings of large stones, still exists in many places with
not a stone displaced, as a proof of the skill of these early
builders. There are remains of an aqueduct at Tusculum which are
interesting from the fact of the horizontal being combined with the
true arch in its construction.
[Illustration: FIG. 123.--CLOACA MAXIMA.]
No Etruscan temples remain now, but we know from Vitruvius that they
consisted of three cells with one or more rows of columns in front,
the intercolumniation or interval between the columns being excessive.
The largest Etruscan temple of which any record remains was that of
Jupiter Capitolinus at Rome, which, under the Empire, became one of
the most splendid temples of antiquity. It was commenced by Tarquinius
Superbus, and is said to have derived its name from the fact of the
builders, when excavating the foundations, coming upon a freshly
bleeding head (_caput_), indicating that the place would eventually
become the chief city of the world. Another form of Etruscan temple is
described by Vitruvius, consisting of one circular cell only, with a
porch. This form was probably the origin of the series of circular
Roman buildings which includes such forms of temples as that at
Tivoli, and many of the famous mausolea, _e.g._ that of Hadrian, and
the culmination of which style is seen in the Pantheon. It is
interesting to notice that the Romans never entirely gave up the
circular form, one instance of its use in Britain at a late period of
the Roman occupation having been discovered in the ruins of Silchester
near Basingstoke; and we shall find that it was perpetuated in
Christian baptisteries, tombs, and occasionally churches.
We know from the traces of such buildings which exist, that the
Etruscans must have constructed theatres and amphitheatres, and it is
recorded that the first Tarquin laid out the Circus Maximus and
instituted the great games held there. At Sutri there are ruins of an
amphitheatre which is nearly a perfect circle, measuring 265 ft. in
its greatest breadth and 295 ft. in length.
There are no remains of other buildings which would enable us to form
an opinion as to the civic architecture of the Etruscans: they must,
however, have attained to a considerable skill in sculpture, as in
some of the tombs figures are represented in high relief which show no
small power of expression. They, too, like the Egyptians, embellished
their tombs with mural paintings. These are generally in outline, and
represent human figures and animals in scenes of every-day life, with
conventionalised foliage, or mythological scenes such as the passage
of the soul after death to the judgment-seat where its actions in life
are to be adjudicated upon. In the plastic arts the Etruscans made
great progress, many of their vases showing a delicacy and grace which
have never been surpassed, and exhibiting in their decorations traces
of both Greek and Egyptian influence.
* * * * *
We now reach the last of the classical styles of antiquity, the
Roman,--a style which, however, is rather an adaptation or
amalgamation of other styles than an original and independent creation
or development. The contrast is very great between the "lively
Grecian," imaginative and idealistic in the highest degree--who seemed
to have an innate genius for art and beauty, and who was always eager
to perpetuate in marble his ideal conception of the "hero from whose
loins he sprung," or to immortalise with some splendid work of art the
name of his mother-city--and the stern, practical Roman, realistic in
his every pore, eager for conquest, and whose one dominant idea was to
bring under his sway all the nations who were brought into contact
with him, and to make his city--as had been foretold--the capital of
the whole world. With this idea always before him, it is no wonder
that such a typical Roman as M. Porcius Cato should look with disdain
upon the fine arts in all their forms, and should regard a love for
the beautiful, whether in literature or art, as synonymous with
effeminacy. Mummius, also, who destroyed Corinth, is said to have been
so little aware of the value of the artistic treasures which he
carried away, as to stipulate with the carriers who undertook to
transport them to Rome, that if any of the works of art were lost they
should be replaced by others of equal value.
When the most prominent statesmen displayed such indifference, it is
not surprising that for nearly 500 years no single trace of any
architectural building of any merit at all in Rome can now be
discovered, and that history is silent as to the existence of any
monuments worthy of being mentioned. Works of public utility of a
very extensive nature were indeed carried out during this period;
such, for example, as the Appian Way from Rome to Capua, which was the
first paved road in Rome, and was constructed by the Censor Appius
Claudius in B.C. 309. This was 14 ft. wide and 3 ft. thick, in three
layers: 1st, of rough stones grouted together; 2nd, of gravel; and
3rd, of squared stones of various dimensions. The same Censor also
brought water from Praeneste to Rome by a subterranean channel 11 miles
long. Several bridges were also erected, and Cato the Censor is said
to have built a basilica.
Until about 150 B.C. all the buildings of Rome were constructed either
of brick or the local stone; and though we hear nothing of
architecture as a fine art, we cannot hesitate to admit that during
this period the Romans carried the art of construction, and especially
that of employing materials of small dimensions and readily
obtainable, in buildings of great size, to a remarkable pitch of
perfection. It was not till after the fall of Carthage and the
destruction of Corinth, when Greece became a Roman province under the
name of Achaia--both which events occurred in the year 146 B.C.--that
Rome became desirous of emulating, to a certain extent, the older
civilisation which she had destroyed; and about this time she became
so enormously wealthy that vast sums of money were expended, both
publicly and privately, in the erection of monuments, many of which
remain to the present day, more or less altered. The first marble
temple in Rome was built by the Consul Q. Metellus Macedonicus, who
died B.C. 115. Roman architecture from this period began to show a
wonderful diversity in the objects to which it was directed,--a
circumstance perhaps as interesting as its great scientific and
structural advance upon all preceding styles. In the earlier styles
temples, tombs, and palaces were the only buildings deemed worthy of
architectural treatment; but under the Romans baths, theatres,
amphitheatres, basilicas, aqueducts, triumphal arches, &c., were
carried out just as elaborately as the temples of the gods.
It was under the Emperors that the full magnificence of Roman
architectural display was reached. The famous boast of Augustus, that
he found Rome of brick and left her of marble, gives expression in a
few words to what was the great feature of his reign. Succeeding
emperors lavished vast sums on buildings and public works of all
kinds; and thus it comes to pass that though the most destructive of
all agencies, hostile invasions, conflagrations, and long periods of
neglect, have each in turn done their utmost to destroy the vestiges
of Imperial Rome, there still remain fragments, and in one or two
instances whole monuments, enough to make Rome, after Athens, the
richest store of classic architectural antiquities in the world.
But it was not in Rome only that great buildings were erected. The
whole known civilised world was under Roman dominion, and wherever a
centre of government or even a flourishing town existed there sprang
up the residences of the dominant race, and their places of business,
public worship, and public amusement. Consequently, we find in our own
country, and in France, Spain, Germany, Italy, North Africa, and
Egypt--in short, in all the countries where Roman rule was
established--examples of temples, amphitheatres, theatres, triumphal
arches, and dwelling-houses, some of them of great interest and
occasionally in admirable preservation.
FOOTNOTE:
[19] The story of the Tarquins probably points to a period when the
chief supremacy at Rome was in the hands of an Etruscan family, and is
interesting for this reason.
[Illustration: FIG. 124.--"INCANTADA" IN SALONICA.]
CHAPTER IX.
THE BUILDINGS OF THE ROMANS.
The temples in Rome were not, as in Greece and Egypt, the structures
upon which the architect lavished all the resources of his art and his
science. The general form of them was copied from that made use of by
the Greeks, but the spirit in which the original idea was carried out
was entirely different. In a word, the temples of Rome were by no
means worthy of her size and position as the metropolis of the world,
and very few remains of them exist.
[Illustration: FIG. 125.--IONIC ORDER FROM THE TEMPLE OF FORTUNA
VIRILIS, ROME.]
Ten columns are still standing of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina
(now the church of San Lorenzo in Miranda): it occupied the site of a
previous temple and was dedicated by Antoninus Pius to his wife
Faustina. The Temple (supposed) of Fortuna Virilis, in the Ionic style
(Fig. 125), still exists as the church of Santa Maria Egiziaca: this
was tetrastyle, with half-columns all round it, and this was of the
kind called by Vitruvius "pseudo-peripteral." A few fragmentary
remains of other temples exist in Rome, but in some of the Roman
provinces far finer specimens of temples remain, of which perhaps the
best is the Maison Carree at Nimes (Fig. 126). Here we find the Roman
plan of a single cell and a deep portico in front, while the sides and
rear have the columns attached. The intercolumniations and the details
of the capitals and entablature are, however, almost pure Greek. The
date of this temple is uncertain, but it is most probable that it was
erected during the reign of Hadrian. The same emperor is said to have
completed the magnificent Temple of Jupiter Olympius at Athens, which
was 354 ft. long by 171 ft. wide. It consisted of a cell flanked on
each side by a double row of detached columns; in front was one row of
columns in antis, and three other rows in front of these, while there
were also three rows in the rear: as the columns were of the
Corinthian order, and nearly 60 ft. in height, it may be imagined that
it was a splendid edifice.
[Illustration: FIG. 126.--ROMAN-CORINTHIAN TEMPLE AT NIMES
(MAISON-CARREE). PROBABLY OF THE TIME OF HADRIAN.]
The ruins of another magnificent provincial Roman temple exist at
Baalbek--the ancient Heliopolis--in Syria, not far from Damascus. This
building was erected during the time of the Antonines, probably by
Antoninus Pius himself, and originally it must have been of very
extensive dimensions, the portico alone being 180 ft. long and about
37 ft. deep. This gives access to a small hexagonal court, on the
western side of which a triple gateway opens into the Great Court,
which is a vast quadrangle about 450 ft. long by 400 ft. broad, with
ranges of small chambers or niches on three sides, some of which
evidently had at one time beautifully groined roofs. At the western
end of this court, on an artificial elevation, stand the remains of
what is called the Great Temple. This was originally 290 ft. long by
160 ft. wide, and had 54 columns supporting its roof, six only of
which now remain erect. The height of these columns, including base
and capital, is 75 ft., and their diameter is 7 ft. at base and about
6 ft. 6 in. at top; they are of the Corinthian order, and above them
rises an elaborately moulded entablature, 14 ft. in height. Each of
the columns is composed of three stones only, secured by strong iron
cramps; and indeed one of the most striking features of this group of
buildings is the colossal size of the stones used in their
construction. The quarries from which these stones were hewn are close
at hand, and in them is one stone surpassing all the others in
magnitude, its dimensions being 68 ft. by 14 ft. 2 in. by 13 ft.
11 in. It is difficult to imagine what means can have existed for
transporting so huge a mass, the weight of which has been calculated
at 1100 tons.
[Illustration: FIG. 127.--GROUND-PLAN OF THE TEMPLE OF VESTA AT
TIVOLI.]
[Illustration: FIG. 128.--CORINTHIAN ORDER FROM THE TEMPLE OF VESTA
AT TIVOLI.]
Other smaller temples exist in the vicinity, all of which are lavishly
decorated, but on the whole the ornamentation shows an exuberance of
detail which somewhat offends a critical artistic taste.
[Illustration: FIG. 129.--THE TEMPLE OF VESTA AT TIVOLI. PLAN
(LOOKING UP) AND SECTION OF PART OF THE PERISTYLE.]
Circular temples were an elegant variety, which seems to have been
originated by the Romans, and of which two well-known examples
remain--the Temples of Vesta at Rome and at Tivoli. The columns of the
temple at Tivoli (Fig. 128) form a well-known and pleasing variety of
the Corinthian order, and the circular form of the building as shown
on the plan (Fig. 127) gives excellent opportunities for good
decorative treatment, as may be judged of by the enlarged diagram of
part of the peristyle (Fig. 129).
_Basilicas._
Among the most remarkable of the public buildings of Roman times, both
in the mother-city and in the provinces, were the Basilicas or Halls
of Justice, which were also used as commercial exchanges. It is also
believed that Basilicas existed in some Greek cities, but no clue to
their structural arrangements exists, and whence originated the idea
of the plan of these buildings we are unable to state; their striking
similarity to some of the rock-cut halls or temples of India has been
already pointed out. They were generally (though not always) covered
halls, oblong in shape, divided into three or five aisles by two or
more rows of columns, the centre aisle being much wider than those at
the sides: over the latter, galleries were frequently erected. At one
end was a semicircular recess or apse, the floor of which was raised
considerably above the level of the rest of the building, and here the
presiding magistrate sat to hear causes tried. Four[20] of these
buildings are mentioned by ancient writers as having existed in
republican times, viz. the Basilica Portia, erected in B.C. 184, by
Cato the Censor; the Basilica Emilia et Fulvia, erected in B.C. 179 by
the censors M. Fulvius Nobilior and M. AEmilius Lepidus, and afterwards
enlarged and called the Basilica Paulli; the Basilica Sempronia,
erected in B.C. 169 by Tib. Sempronius Gracchus; and the Basilica
Julia, erected by Julius Caesar, B.C. 46. All these buildings had
wooden roofs, and were of no great architectural merit, and they
perished at a remote date. Under the Empire, basilicas of much greater
size and magnificence were erected; and remains of that of Trajan,
otherwise called the Basilica Ulpia, have been excavated in the Forum
of Trajan. This was about 360 ft. long by 180 ft. wide, had four rows
of columns inside, and it supposed to have been covered by a
semicircular wooden roof. Apollodorus of Damascus was the architect of
this building. Another basilica of which remains exist is that of
Maxentius, which after his overthrow by Constantine in A.D. 312, was
known as the Basilica Constantiniana. This structure was of stone, and
had a vaulted roof; it was 195 ft. between the walls, and was divided
into three aisles by piers with enormous columns standing in front of
them.
[Illustration: FIG. 130.--GROUND-PLAN OF THE BASILICA ULPIA, ROME.]
One provincial basilica, that at Treves, still stands; and although it
must have been considerably altered, it is by far the best existing
example of this kind of building. The internal columns do not exist
here, and it is simply a rectangular hall about 175 ft. by 85 ft.,
with the usual semicircular apse.
The chief interest attaching to these basilicas lies in the fact that
they formed the first places of Christian assembly, and that they
served as the model upon which the first Christian churches were
built.
_Theatres and Amphitheatres._
Although dramas and other plays were performed in Rome as early as 240
B.C., there seems to have been a strong prejudice against permanent
buildings for their representation, as it is recorded that a decree
was passed in B.C. 154 forbidding the construction of such buildings.
Mummius, the conqueror of Corinth, obtained permission to erect a
wooden theatre for the performance of dramas as one of the shows of
his triumph, and after this many buildings of the kind were erected,
but all of a temporary nature; and it was not till B.C. 61 that the
first permanent theatre was built by Pompey. This, and the theatres of
Balbus and Marcellus, appear to have been the only permanent theatres
that were erected in Imperial Rome; and there are no remains of any
but the last of these, and this is much altered. So that, were it not
for the remains of theatres found at Pompeii, it would be almost
impossible to tell how they were arranged; but from these we can see
that the stage was raised and separated from the part appropriated to
the spectators by a semicircular area, much like that which in Greek
theatres was allotted to the chorus: in the Roman ones this was
assigned for the use of the senators. The portion devoted to the
spectators--called the Cavea--was also semicircular on plan, and
consisted of tiers of steps rising one above the other, and divided at
intervals by wide passages and converging staircases communicating
with the porticoes, which ran round the whole theatre at every story.
[Illustration: FIG. 131.--PLAN OF THE COLOSSEUM, ROME.]
At Orange, in the South of France, are the remains of a very fine
theatre, similar in plan to that described. The great wall which
formed the back of the scene in this building is still standing, and
is one of the most magnificent pieces of masonry existing.
[Illustration: FIG. 132.--THE COLOSSEUM. SECTION AND ELEVATION.]
Although the Romans were not particularly addicted to dramatic
representations, yet they were passionately fond of shows and games of
all kinds: hence, not only in Rome itself, but in almost every Roman
settlement, from Silchester to Verona, are found traces of their
amphitheatres, and the mother-city can claim the possession of the
most stupendous fabric of the kind that was ever erected--the
Colosseum or Flavian Amphitheatre, which was commenced by Vespasian
and finished by his son Titus. An amphitheatre is really a double
theatre without a stage, and with the space in the centre unoccupied
by seats. This space, which was sunk several feet below the first row
of seats, was called the arena, and was appropriated to the various
exhibitions which took place in the building. The plan was elliptical
or oval, and this shape seems to have been universal.
The Colosseum, whose ruins still remain to attest its pristine
magnificence--
"Arches on arches, as it were that Rome,
Collecting the chief trophies of her line,
Would build up all her triumphs in one dome"[21]--
was 620 ft. long and 513 wide, and the height was about 162 ft. It was
situated in the hollow between the Esquiline and Caelian hills. The
ranges of seats were admirably planned so as to enable all the
audience to have a view of what was going on in the arena, and great
skill was shown both in the arrangement of the approaches to the
different tiers and in the structural means for supporting the seats,
and double corridors ran completely round the building on each floor,
affording ready means of exit. Various estimates have been made of the
number of spectators that could be accommodated, and these range from
50,000 to 100,000, but probably 80,000 was the maximum. Recent
excavations have brought to light the communications which existed
between the arena and the dens where the wild animals and human slaves
and prisoners were confined, and some of the water channels used when
mimic sea-fights were exhibited. The external facade is composed of
four stories, separated by entablatures that run completely round the
building without a break. The three lower stories consist of a series
of semicircular arched openings, eighty in number, separated by piers
with attached columns in front of them, the Doric order being used in
the lowest story, the Ionic in the second, and the Corinthian in the
third; the piers and columns are elevated on stylobates; the
entablatures have a comparatively slight projection, and there are no
projecting keystones in the arches. In the lowest range these openings
are 13 ft. 4 in. wide, except the four which are at the ends of the
two axes of the ellipse, and these are 14 ft. 6 in. wide. The diameter
of the columns is 2 ft. 83/4 in. The topmost story, which is
considerably more lofty than either of the lower ones, was a nearly
solid wall enriched by Corinthian pilasters. In this story occur two
tiers of small square openings in the alternate spaces between the
pilasters. These openings are placed accurately over the centres of
the arches of the lower stories. Immediately above the higher range of
square openings are a series of corbels--three between each pair of
pilasters--which probably received the ends of the poles carrying the
huge awning which protected the spectators from the sun's rays. The
whole is surmounted by a heavy cornice, in which, at intervals
immediately over each corbel, are worked square mortise holes, forming
sockets through which the poles of the awning passed. The stone of
which the facade of the Colosseum is built is a local stone, called
travertine, the blocks of which are secured by iron cramps without
cement. Nearly all the internal portion of the building is of brick,
and the floors of the corridors, &c., are paved with flat bricks
covered with hard stucco. These amphitheatres were occasionally the
scene of imitations of marine conflicts, when the arena was flooded
with water and mimic vessels of war engaged each other. Very complete
arrangements were made, by means of small aqueducts, for leading the
water into the arena and for carrying it off.
Apart from theatrical representations and gladiatorial combats, the
Romans had an inordinate passion for chariot races. For those the
circi were constructed, of which class of buildings the Circus Maximus
was the largest. This, originally laid out by Tarquinius Priscus, was
reconstructed on a larger scale by Julius Caesar. It was circular at
one end and rectangular at the other, at which was the entrance. On
both sides of the entrance were a number of small arched chambers,
called _carceres_, from which the chariots started. The course was
divided down the centre by a low wall, called the _spina_, which was
adorned with various sculptures. The seats rose in a series of covered
porticoes all round the course, except at the entrance. As the length
of the Circus Maximus was nearly 700 yards, and the breadth about 135
yards, it is possible that Dionysius may not have formed an
exaggerated notion of its capacity when he says it would accommodate
150,000 spectators.
In the Roman provinces amphitheatres were often erected; and at Pola
in Istria, Verona in Italy, and Nimes and Arles in France, fine
examples remain. A rude Roman amphitheatre, with seats cut in the turf
of a hill-side, exists to this day at the old town of Dorchester in
Dorset, which was anciently a Roman settlement.
_Baths (Thermae)._
Nothing can give us a more impressive idea of the grandeur and lavish
display of Imperial Rome than the remains of the huge Thermae, or
bathing establishments, which still exist. Between the years 10 A.D.,
when Agrippa built the first public baths, and 324 A.D., when those
of Constantine were erected, no less than twelve of these vast
establishments were erected by various emperors, and bequeathed to the
people. Of the whole number, the baths of Caracalla and of Diocletian
are the only ones which remain in any state of preservation, and these
were probably the most extensive and magnificent of all. All these
splendid buildings were really nothing more than bribes to secure the
favour of the populace; for it seems quite clear that the public had
practically free entrance to them, the only charge mentioned by
writers of the time being a quadrans, about a farthing of our money.
Gibbon says, "The meanest Roman could purchase with a small copper
coin the daily enjoyment of a scene of pomp and luxury which might
excite the envy of the kings of Asia." And this language is not
exaggerated. Not only were there private bath-rooms, swimming-baths,
hot baths, vapour-baths, and, in fact, all the appurtenances of the
most approved Turkish baths of modern times, but there were also
gymnasia, halls for various games, lecture-halls, libraries, and
theatres in connection with the baths, all lavishly ornamented with
the finest paintings and sculpture that could be obtained. Stone seems
to have been but sparingly used in the construction of these
buildings, which were almost entirely of brick faced with stucco: this
served as the ground for an elaborate series of fresco paintings.
[Illustration: FIG. 133.--PLAN OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING, BATHS OF
CARACALLA, ROME.]
The baths of Caracalla, at the foot of the Aventine hill, erected A.D.
217, comprised a quadrangular block of buildings of about 1150 ft.
(about the fifth of a mile) each way. The side facing the street
consisted of a portico the whole length of the facade, behind which
were numerous ranges of private bath-rooms. The side and rear blocks
contained numerous halls and porticoes, the precise object of which
it is now very difficult to ascertain. As Byron says:
"Temples, baths, or halls?
Pronounce who can."
This belt of buildings surrounded an open courtyard or garden, in
which was placed the principal bathing establishment (Fig. 133), a
building 730 ft. by 380 ft., which contained the large piscina, or
swimming-bath, various hot baths, dressing-rooms, gymnasia, and other
halls for athletic exercises. In the centre of one of the longer sides
was a large semicircular projection, roofed with a dome, which was
lined with brass: this rotunda was called the solar cell. From the
ruins of these baths were taken some of the most splendid specimens of
antique sculpture, such as the Farnese Hercules and the Flora in the
Museum of Naples.
The baths of Diocletian, erected just at the commencement of the
fourth century A.D., were hardly inferior to those of Caracalla, but
modern and ancient buildings are now intermingled to such an extent
that the general plan of the buildings cannot now be traced with
accuracy. There are said to have been over 3000 marble seats in these
baths; the walls were covered with mosaics, and the columns were of
Egyptian granite and green Numidian marble. The Ephebeum, or grand
hall, still exists as the church of Santa Maria degli Angeli, having
been restored by Michelangelo. It is nearly 300 ft. long by 90 ft.
wide, and is roofed by three magnificent cross vaults, supported on
eight granite columns 45 ft. in height. (Fig. 134.)
There is one ancient building in Rome more impressive than any other,
not only because it is in a better state of preservation, but because
of the dignity with which it has been designed, the perfection with
which it has been constructed, and the effectiveness of the mode in
which its interior is lighted. We allude to the Pantheon. Opinions
differ as to whether this was a Hall attached to the thermae of
Agrippa, or whether it was a temple. Without attempting to determine
this point, we may at any rate claim that the interior of this
building admirably illustrates the boldness and telling power with
which the large halls forming part of the thermae were designed; and,
whether it belonged to such a building or not, it is wonderfully well
fitted to illustrate this subject.
[Illustration: FIG. 134.--INTERIOR OF SANTA MARIA DEGLI ANGELI,
ROME.]
[Illustration: FIG. 135.--THE PANTHEON, ROME. GROUND-PLAN.]
[Illustration: FIG. 136.--THE PANTHEON, ROME. EXTERIOR.]
The Pantheon is the finest example of a domed hall which we have
left. The building, which forms the church of Santa Maria ad Martyres,
has been considerably altered at various times since its erection, and
now consists of a rotunda with a rectangular portico in front of it.
The rotunda was most probably erected by Agrippa, the son-in-law of
Augustus, in B.C. 27, and is a most remarkable instance of clever
construction at so early a date. The diameter of the interior is
145 ft. 6 in., and the height to the top of the dome is 147 ft. In
addition to the entrance, the walls are broken up by seven large
niches, three of which are semicircular on plan, and the others,
alternating with them, rectangular. The walls are divided into two
stories by an entablature supported by columns and pilasters; but
although this is now cut through by the arches of the niches, it is at
least probable that originally this was not the case, and that the
entablature ran continuously round the walls, as shown in Fig. 137,
which is a restoration of the Pantheon by Adler. Above the attic story
rises the huge hemispherical dome, which is pierced at its summit by a
circular opening 27 ft. in diameter, through which a flood of light
pours down and illuminates the whole of the interior. The dome is
enriched by boldly recessed panels, and these were formerly covered
with bronze ornaments, which have been removed for the sake of the
metal. The marble enrichments of the attic have also disappeared, and
their place has been taken by common and tawdry decorations more
adapted to the stage of a theatre. But notwithstanding everything that
has been done to detract from the imposing effect of the building by
the alteration of its details, there is still, taking it as a whole, a
simple grandeur in the design, a magnificence in the material
employed, and a quiet harmony in the illumination, that impart to the
interior a character of sublimity which nothing can impair. The
rectangular portico was added at some subsequent period, and consists
of sixteen splendid Corinthian columns (Fig. 138), eight in front
supporting the pediment, and the other eight dividing the portico into
three bays, in precisely the same way as if it formed the pronaos to
the three cells of an Etruscan temple.
[Illustration: FIG. 137.--THE PANTHEON, ROME. INTERIOR.]
[Illustration: FIG. 138.--THE CORINTHIAN ORDER FROM THE PANTHEON,
ROME.]
_Bridges and Aqueducts._
The earliest Roman bridges were of wood, and the Pons Sublicius,
though often rebuilt, continued to be of this material until the time
of Pliny, but it was impossible for a people who made such use of the
arch to avoid seeing the great advantage this form gave them in the
construction of bridges, and several of these formed of stone spanned
the Tiber even before the time of the Empire. The finest Roman
bridges, however, were built in the provinces. Trajan constructed one
over the Danube which was 150 ft. high and 60 ft. wide, and the arches
of which were of no less than 170 ft. span. This splendid structure
was destroyed by his successor, Hadrian, who was probably jealous of
it. The bridge over the Tagus at Alcantara, which was constructed by
Hadrian, is another very fine example. There were six arches here, of
which the two centre ones had a span of 100 ft.
The Roman aqueducts afford striking evidence of the building
enterprise and architectural skill of the people. Pliny says of these
works: "If any one will carefully consider the quantity of water used
in the open air, in private baths, swimming-baths, houses, gardens,
&c., and thinks of the arches that have been built, the hills that
have been tunnelled, and the valleys that have been levelled for the
purpose of conducting the water to its destination, he must confess
that nothing has existed in the world more calculated to excite
admiration." The same sentiment strikes an observer of to-day when
looking at the ruins of these aqueducts. At the end of the first
century A.D. we read of nine aqueducts in Rome, and in the time of
Procopius (A.D. 550) there were fourteen in use. Of these, the Aqua
Claudia and the Anio Novus were the grandest and most costly. Those
were constructed about the year 48 A.D., and entered the city upon the
same arches, though at different levels, the Aqua Claudia being the
lower. The arches carrying the streams were over nine miles long, and
in some cases 109 ft. high. They were purely works of utility, and had
no architectural decorations; but they were most admirably adapted for
their purpose, and were so solidly constructed, that portions of them
are still in use. Some of the provincial aqueducts, such as those of
Tarragona and Segovia in Spain, were more ornamental, and had a double
tier of arches. The Pont du Gard, not far from Nimes, in France, is a
well-known and very picturesque structure of this character.
_Commemorative Monuments._
These comprise triumphal arches, columns, and tombs. The former
consisted of a rectangular mass of masonry having sculptured
representations of the historical event to be commemorated, enriched
with attached columns on pedestals, supporting an entablature crowned
with a high attic, on which there was generally an inscription. In the
centre was the wide and lofty arched opening. The Arch of Titus,
recording the capture of Jerusalem, is one of the finest examples.
Later on triumphal arches were on a more extended scale, and comprised
a small arch on each side of the large one; examples of which may be
seen in the arches of Septimius Severus and of Constantine (Fig. 139).
The large arched gateways which are met with in various parts of
Europe--such as the Porte d'Arroux at Autun, and the Porta Nigra at
Treves--are monuments very similar to triumphal arches. There remain
also smaller monuments of the same character, such as the so-called
Arch of the Goldsmiths in Rome (Fig. 1).
[Illustration: FIG. 139.--THE ARCH OF CONSTANTINE, ROME.]
Columns were erected in great numbers during the time of the Emperors
as memorials of victory. Of these the Column of Trajan and that of
Marcus Aurelius are the finest. The former was erected in the centre
of Trajan's Forum, in commemoration of the Emperor's victory over the
Dacians. It is of the Doric order, 132 ft. 10 in. high, including the
statue. The shaft is constructed of thirty-four pieces of marble
joined with bronze cramps. The figures on the pedestal are very finely
carved, and the entire shaft is encircled by a series of elaborate
bas-reliefs winding round it in a spiral from its base to its capital.
The beauty of the work on this shaft may be best appreciated by a
visit to the cast of it set up--in two heights, unfortunately--at the
South Kensington Museum. The Column of Marcus Aurelius, generally
known as the Antonine Column, is similarly enriched, but is not equal
to the Trajan Column.
The survival of Etruscan habits is clearly seen in the construction of
Roman tombs, which existed in enormous numbers outside the gates of
the city. Merivale says: "The sepulchres of twenty generations lined
the sides of the high-roads for several miles beyond the gates, and
many had considerable architectural pretensions." That of Cecilia
Metella is a typical example. Here we find a square basement
surmounted by a circular tower-like structure, with a frieze and
cornice. This was erected about B.C. 60, by Crassus. The mausoleum of
Augustus was on a much more extensive scale, and consisted of four
cylindrical stories, one above the other, decreasing in diameter as
they ascended, and the topmost of all was crowned with a colossal
statue of the Emperor. The tomb of Hadrian, on the banks of the
Tiber--now known as the Castle of Sant' Angelo--was even more
magnificent. This comprised a square base, 75 ft. high, the side of
which measured about 340 ft.; above this was a cylindrical building
surmounted by a circular peristyle of thirty-four Corinthian columns.
On the top was a quadriga with a statue of the Emperor. These mausolea
were occasionally octagonal or polygonal in plan, surmounted by a
dome, and cannot fail to remind us of the Etruscan tumuli.
Another kind of tomb, of less magnificence, was the columbarium, which
was nothing more than a subterranean chamber, the walls of which had a
number of small apertures in them for receiving the cinerary urns
containing the ashes of the bodies which had been cremated. In the
eastern portion of the Empire, in rocky districts, the tombs were cut
in the rock, and the facade was elaborately decorated with columns and
other architectural features.
_Domestic Architecture._
Of all the palaces which the Roman emperors built for themselves, and
which we know from historical records to have been of the most
magnificent description, nothing now remains in Rome itself that is
not too completely ruined to enable any one to restore its plan with
accuracy, though considerable remains exist of the Palace of the
Caesars on the Palatine Hill. In fact, the palace of Diocletian at
Spalatro, in Dalmatia, is the only remaining example in the whole of
the Roman empire of the dwelling-house of an emperor, and even this
was not built till after Diocletian had resigned the imperial
dignity, so that its date is the early part of the fourth century A.D.
This palace is a rectangle, measuring about 700 ft. one way and 590 ft.
the other, and covers an area of nearly 10 acres. It is surrounded
by high walls, broken at intervals by square and octagonal towers, and
contains temples, baths, and extensive galleries, besides the private
apartments of the Emperor and dwellings for the principal officers of
the household. The architect of this building broke away from
classical traditions to a great extent; for example, the columns stand
on corbels instead of pedestals, the entablatures being much broken,
and the arches spring directly from the capitals of the columns (Fig.
149).
The private houses in Borne were of two kinds: the _insula_ and the
_domus_. The insula was a block of buildings several stories high,
frequently let out to different families in flats. The ground-floor
was generally given up to shops, which had no connection with the
upper parts of the building; and one roof covered the whole. This kind
of house was generally tenanted by the poorer class of tradesmen and
artificers. The other kind of house, the domus, was a detached
mansion. The excavations at Pompeii have done much to elucidate a
number of points in connection with Roman dwellings which had been the
subject of much discussion by scholars, but we must not too hastily
assume that the Pompeian houses are the exact counterpart of those of
ancient Rome, as Pompeii was what may be called a Romano-Greek city.
[Illustration: FIG. 140.--GROUND-PLAN OF THE HOUSE OF PANSA, POMPEII.]
[Illustration: FIG. 141.--GROUND-PLAN OF THE HOUSE OF THE TRAGIC POET,
POMPEII.]
The general arrangements of a Roman house were as follows: next the
street an open space was frequently left, with porticoes on each side
of it provided with seats: this constituted the vestibule, and was
entirely outside the house;[22] the entrance-door opened into a
narrow passage, called the _prothyrum_, which led to the _atrium_,[23]
which in the houses of Republican Rome was the principal apartment,
though afterwards it served as a sort of waiting-room for the clients
and retainers of the house; it was an open court, roofed in on all
the four sides, but open to the sky in the centre. The simplest form
was called the Tuscan atrium, where the roof was simply a lean-to
sloping towards the centre, the rafters being supported on beams, two
of which rested on the walls of the atrium, and had two other
cross-beams trimmed into them. The centre opening was called the
_impluvium_, and immediately under it a tank, called the _compluvium_,
was formed in the pavement to collect the rain-water (Fig. 142). When
the atrium became larger, and the roof had to be supported by
columns, it was called a _cavaedium_.[24] At the end of this apartment
were three others, open in front, the largest, in the centre, called
_tablinum_, and the two side ones _alae_;[25] these were
muniment-rooms, where all the family archives were kept, and their
position is midway between the semi-public part of the house, which
lay towards the front, and the strictly domestic and private part,
which lay in the rear. At the sides of the atrium in the larger houses
were placed small rooms, which served as sleeping chambers.
[Illustration: FIG. 142.--THE ATRIUM OF A POMPEIAN HOUSE.]
From the end of the atrium a passage, or sometimes two passages,
called the _fauces_, running by the side of the tablinum, led to the
_peristylium_,[26] which was the grand private reception-room; this
also was a court open to the sky in the centre, and among the wealthy
Romans its roof was supported by columns of the rarest marbles. Round
the peristyle were grouped the various private rooms, which varied
according to the size of the house and the taste of the owner. There
was always one dining-room (_triclinium_), and frequently two or more,
which were arranged with different aspects, for use in different
seasons of the year. If several dining-rooms existed, they were of
various sizes and decorated with various degrees of magnificence; and
a story is told of one of the most luxurious Romans of Cicero's time,
that he had simply to tell his slaves which room he would dine in for
them to know what kind of banquet he wished to be prepared. In the
largest houses there were saloons (_aeci_), parlours (_exedrae_),
picture galleries (_pinacothecae_), chapels (_lararia_), and various
other apartments. The kitchen, with scullery and bakehouse attached,
was generally placed in one angle of the peristyle, round which
various sleeping-chambers, according to the size of the house, were
arranged. Most of the rooms appear to have been on the ground-floor,
and probably depended for their light upon the doorway only; though
in some instances at Pompeii small windows exist high up in the walls.
[Illustration: FIG. 143.--WALL DECORATION FROM POMPEII.]
In the extreme rear of the larger houses there was generally a garden;
and in those which were without this, the dead walls in the rear were
frequently painted so as to imitate a garden. The houses of the
wealthy Romans were decorated with the utmost magnificence: marble
columns, mosaic pavements, and charming pieces of sculpture adorned
their apartments, and the walls were in all cases richly painted (Fig.
143), being divided into panels, in the centre of which were
represented sometimes human figures, sometimes landscapes, and
sometimes pictures of historical events. All the decoration of Roman
houses was internal only: the largest and most sumptuous mansion had
little to distinguish it, next the street, from a comparatively humble
abode; and, with the exception of the space required for the vestibule
and entrance doorway, nearly the whole of the side of the house next
the street was most frequently appropriated to shops. All that we are
able to learn of the architecture of Roman private houses, whether
from contemporary descriptions or from the uncovered remains of
Pompeii and Herculaneum,[27] points to the fact that it, even in a
greater measure than the public architecture, was in no sense of
indigenous growth, but was simply a copy of Greek arrangement and
Greek decoration.
FOOTNOTES:
[20] The passage in Varro, which is the sole authority for the
Basilica Opimia, is generally considered to be corrupt.
[21] Byron.
[22] This does not occur in the Pompeian houses.
[23] Marked _a_, _a_, on the plans.
[24] Vitruvius, however, seems to use the terms _atrium_ and
_cavaedium_ as quite synonymous.
[25] Marked respectively _c_, and _f_, _f_, on the plan of the House
of Pansa.
[26] Marked _b_, _b_, on the plans.
[27] At the Crystal Palace can be seen an interesting reproduction of
a Pompeian house, which was designed by the late Sir Digby Wyatt. It
gives a very faithful reproduction of the arrangement and the size of
an average Pompeian house; and though every part is rather more fully
covered with decoration than was usual in the originals, the
decorations of each room faithfully reproduce the treatment of some
original in Pompeii or Herculaneum.
[Illustration: FIG. 144.--CARVING FROM THE FORUM OF NERVA, ROME.]