and its great legacy to succeeding styles.
Etruria as well as Greece sent artists to Rome, and the conjunction of
the methods used in the two countries produced Roman art.
“The Romans took from the Etruscans the semicircular arch, formed of
jointed stones; from the populations of the Campagna they obtained
the general arrangement of sacred edifices, the Greek orders, the
distribution and decoration of private dwellings. They drew thus from two
different sources, and endeavoured to unite two principles diametrically
opposed to one another—the principle of the Greek lintel and the Etruscan
arch. In doing this they show clearly that their ideas upon the arts were
but little better than those of pirates, whose acts are actuated by pride
rather than by taste, and who adorn themselves in spoils of distinctly
different origin, the mingling of which produces unseemly contrasts.”[3]
[3] Entretiens sur l’Architecture.
[Illustration:
COLUMN. ENTABLATURE.
PEDESTAL. BASE. SHAFT. CAPITAL ARCHITRAVE FRIEZE. CORNICE.
WASH.
OVOLO.
ASTRAGAL.
CORONA.
ASTRAGAL.
CYMA REVERSA.
TENIA.
FACIA.
ABACUS.
OVOLO.
NECK.
ASTRAGAL.
FILLET.
TORUS.
PLINTH.
TUSCAN. DORIC.
THE ROMAN ORDERS.]
Illustration:
IONIC. CORINTHIAN.
THE ROMAN ORDERS.]
[Illustration: COMPOSITE.]
In fact, the Greek orders, modified to suit the taste of the Romans, and
combined with the Etruscan arch and vault, formed the basis of all Roman
architecture. The scale of their buildings, however, was vastly greater
than that of those upon which they were modelled. The colonnades of their
palaces and the arcades of their aqueducts were to be measured by the
mile, the vaults of their baths were of prodigious span, and, in general
size and number, the edifices erected by the Romans exceeded anything
which had come before them.
The Roman orders were five in number, namely, the Tuscan, Doric, Ionic,
Corinthian, and Composite.
The Tuscan we have already examined. The Doric was somewhat more
elaborate, having additional mouldings in the capital and base, and
the triglyph ornament in the frieze. The Ionic and Corinthian were but
modifications of the corresponding Greek orders. The Composite was of the
same proportion as the Corinthian, the capital being a combination of the
Ionic and Corinthian.
The Corinthian order was the most generally used, its rich character
suiting the ostentatious ideas of the Romans. The superposition of
columns was a common method of indicating different stories, and
different orders were often employed where different-sized
columns occurred in the same building.
In plan the Roman buildings were rectangular, polygonal, and circular, or
combinations of these geometrical forms. The materials used were local
stone, imported marbles and alabaster, and bricks, which were flatter and
longer than the form employed at the present day. The Romans excelled in
their mortars and cements, which were of a strength sufficient to make
their walls virtually of one mass.
In bonding their stone they employed various methods, including those of
the Greeks. Of these, a favourite one was the building of exterior faces
only, and filling up the intervening space with broken stone and mortar.
In order to produce the greatest effect at the least cost, in the use
of marble, they resorted to panelling the external surfaces only with
thin slabs. Interiors were lined with stucco and frequently ornamented
with paintings, and the floors inlaid with mosaic. Roman mouldings were
sections of the sphere, differing from the Greek, which were hyperbolas
or parabolas.
The chief constructions of the Romans were houses, temples, palaces,
amphitheatres, theatres, aqueducts, sewers, baths, triumphal arches,
tombs and commemorative structures, camps, bridges, and basilicas.
[Illustration: PALACE OF DIOCLETIAN AT SPALATRO.
(_From Durand._)]
In, and in close proximity to, the Forum Romanum, or Campo Vaccino, are
admirable examples of nearly all these different buildings. The level of
the ancient market-place is several feet below that of the streets
of modern Rome, but in the excavated portions are to be seen the old
pavements of irregular stone slabs, laid upon concrete foundations and
worn with the wheels of chariots.
Many ruined temples, the arches of Septimius Severus, of Titus and
Constantine, the palace of the Cæsars, the Colosseum, and the Baths of
Constantine are collected here within a stone’s throw. By taking up each
class of buildings separately, however, we will get a better idea of the
nature of Roman architecture than by a description of isolated buildings.
Roman houses resembled in a measure the Greek, the different apartments
being grouped around inner courts. The rooms consisted of halls,
vestibules, banqueting-rooms, and sleeping-chambers, the women not being
separated from the men, as was the case in Greece. The courts were
surrounded by colonnades and in the centre a well was usually placed, to
receive the water from the roofs. Many of the houses were several stories
in height, but a limit to their altitude was fixed by decree.
The excavations in Pompeii have uncovered many interesting specimens of
private dwellings, richly decorated with several paintings and having
elaborate mosaic patterns on their floors.
In the city of Rome the palace of the Cæsars was the most notable example
of domestic architecture, but at the present day it is difficult to
discern among the débris and fallen walls what its original
plan may have been. Some paintings in the so-called house of Livia, upon
the plateau of the palace, however, show that the artists of the period
had attained a high degree of merit.
[Illustration: PLAN OF THE PANTHEON AT ROME]
Roman temples consisted generally of a cella or rectangular apartment,
preceded by a porch, the whole being raised on a platform, reached by
stairs and enclosed by a colonnade below. Occasionally there was a double
cella, with separate entrances and porches, as in that of Venus and
Rome; and there are two remaining examples of circular temples—that of
Vesta, on the Tiber, in Rome, and of the Sybil, at Tivoli—while still
another type, that of the Pantheon of Agrippa, had a circular cella and a
rectangular porch.
The Corinthian order was the most frequently employed, that of the temple
of Jupiter Stator being the richest, while those of the Pantheon, the
Maison Carrée, at Nîmes, and of the temple of Antonine and Faustina are
admirable specimens.
This last is one of the best preserved temples, being very nearly entire
at the present time; its frieze is of the most refined workmanship,
representing allegorical animals, plants, etc.
The temple of Fortuna Virilis is a good example of the Ionic order, but
this order was never a favourite with the Romans.
[Illustration: PLAN OF THE BATHS OF AGRIPPA CONNECTING WITH THE PANTHEON,
ACCORDING TO PALLADIO.
(_From Durand_)]
A debased form of Ionic is that of the temple of Concord, or Vespasian,
where the capital is altered to a considerable extent and a rope
moulding added. A remarkable constructional feature of this temple is the
relieving arch of brick, concealed behind the frieze, to diminish the
weight on the lintel below.
The great drum of the Pantheon, enclosed by a circular vault, is one of
the earliest examples of domical architecture. A notable feature in it
is the absence of the keystone, which is replaced here by an open ring,
leaving an aperture for the entrance of light. The walls are pierced with
niches and relieved by immense arches. The pediment of the porch is one
of the most perfect remaining; in height its proportion exceeds that of
Greek temples.
The temple of Diana, at Nîmes, is a remarkable structure, having three
aisles, the central one being decorated with niches and columns, which
support an entablature and a ribbed vault.
The ruined temples of Baalbek and of Jupiter Olympius, at Athens, are
among the most colossal of this class of building. The Corinthian columns
of the latter measure upward of sixty feet, and their capitals are of
singularly fine workmanship.
The Emperor Hadrian embellished Athens with numerous and splendid
buildings, which to-day have assumed the colour and ruined appearance of
the older constructions of the time of Pericles.
Of the temple of Jupiter Olympius there are scarcely more than a dozen
columns standing of the original one hundred and twenty. The Turks
ground up many of them to make lime for their mortar.
The Romans took their conception of the theatre from the Greeks. The
building was composed of two parts, the one devoted to the stage and its
accessories, and the other to the accommodation of the audience. The
stage was usually in the form of a rectangle, the longer side of which
formed the diameter of the semicircle, which was the plan of the second
part. The latter was composed of concentric seats in successive steps,
to which access was had by stairs radiating from the centre and leading
to an upper surrounding gallery. At the foot of these steps a space was
reserved called the orchestra (Greek, “dancing place”), usually occupied
by the senators. The stage, which was decorated with columns and niches,
was raised above the orchestra, and was connected with the actors’ rooms.
The wall at the back of the stage was carried up to the level of the
circular enclosing wall, and treated with superposed orders. The theatre
of Marcellus, in Rome, and those of Herculaneum, Arles, and Orange are
among the best examples.
The most celebrated amphitheatre (amphi theatron, Greek, “double
theatre”) is that commonly known as the Colosseum, or Flavian
Amphitheatre. It is composed of the arena or oval space, occupied by the
combatants, and of the “visorium,” formed by concentric seats placed in
tiers, one above the other.
[Illustration: PLAN OF THE TEMPLE OF THE SUN AT BAALBEK.]
It was capable of seating eighty thousand spectators, and upon its
arena four thousand gladiators have fought at a time. It was here that
before commencing their combats they came to the foot of the emperor’s
throne, saluting him with the celebrated cry, “Morituri te salutamus.”
The substructure of the building consists of vaulted passages,
communicating with the visorium by numerous staircases, and with the
exterior by the doors called “vomitoria.” The arena was surrounded by a
ditch of running water, and under it were chambers in which prisoners and
animals were confined.
The visorium was divided according to the rank of its occupants. The
upper classes occupied the “podium” or lower gallery, which extended on
either side of the emperor’s throne, at the extremity of the longer axis
of the building. For protection from the elements during performances an
immense sail was stretched over the building from posts inserted in stone
brackets at the top of the exterior wall.
The heights of the three lower stories of the Colosseum are marked
externally by arcades and superposed orders with engaged columns, Doric,
Ionic, and Corinthian, and the fourth and upper one by Corinthian
pilasters. The entablatures of each order are carried around the entire
circumference of the building.
Architects generally criticise this construction adversely, for “if,
on the one hand, the engaged columns might be supposed to serve as
buttresses and thus become a useful decoration, it must
be admitted, on the other, that the projecting entablatures carried
from column to column do more harm than good as regards the solidity of
the building. [The architrave having no longer the force of the Greek
lintel, being composed of several blocks supported by the arch below.]
The Romans, however, did not always falsely apply the true principles of
architecture. In the arena of Nîmes, for instance, the two superposed
orders which serve as buttresses between the arcades of the two stories
on the exterior of that building, are real buttresses. The lower order
is composed of projecting piers, the upper order of engaged columns; the
cornices follow the contour of each pilaster or column and do not form
those projecting belts which are placed so clumsily and uselessly around
such buildings as the theatre of Marcellus and the Colosseum of Rome.”[4]
[4] Viollet le Duc.
This amphitheatre was commenced by Vespasian and continued under Titus,
who dedicated it in the year 80 A.D. In the ninth century it was half
destroyed, and subsequently became a quarry, from which materials were
extracted for the construction of the Farnese palace and other buildings.
A large part, however, is standing to-day, having been rescued from total
destruction by order of Pope Benoit XIV.
There are celebrated remains of amphitheatres at Verona, Pola, Capua,
Arles, and Nîmes. Circuses and Naumachias belong to the same class of
buildings, the one serving for chariot and other races, and the other
for naval combats. The arena in each was oval in plan and from it rose
the successive tiers of broad steps upon which the seats were ranged.
At the top a portico decorated with statues enclosed the whole building.
The Circus Maximus was the most important of these, containing numerous
splendid statues and obelisks, and covering a vast area.
The aqueducts of ancient Rome stretched for miles across the Campagna.
The channel in which the water flowed was supported by one or more
arcades, superposed according to the height required. These arcades
consisted of round brick arches carried on substantial piers, and were
placed where possible upon the highest elevations of the country they
traversed. At intervals wide basins were provided for the collection of
sediment, and reservoirs received the water at their termination. From
the latter pipes supplied the baths and private dwellings.
In France the famous Pont du Gard is a portion of an immense Roman
aqueduct formed of three rows of arcades, which supplied the city of
Nîmes.
Bridges were constructed on the same principle; the arches increasing
their span according to the depth of the piers upon which they rested,
being generally of two stories, the upper one having double the number of
piers.
The Roman bridges and aqueducts in Spain are among the most
justly celebrated, notably those of Segovia, Tarragona, and Alcantara.
Bridging rivers by boats was a common method in use by the Roman armies
under Julius Cæsar. We have also an account of a wooden bridge over the
Danube, constructed by Trajan.
Under every street in Rome there ran vaulted sewers conducting all
impurities into the main artery, called the Cloaca Maxima, which in turn
discharged its contents into the Tiber. This sewer is one of the oldest
examples of the use of voussoirs, dating from the reign of Tarquinius
Priscus. It is covered by a triple vault, sustaining the street above.
Agrippa conducted the waters of several streams into the sewers and
appointed inspectors to keep them in repair and good order.
In the building of the baths of Rome, Agrippa, Nero, Vespasian,
Caracalla, Titus, Diocletian, and Constantine vied with each other in
the production of the most magnificent structures. They are to-day in a
hopelessly ruined condition, but from the numerous fragments of carved
marble and panelled stucco lying on their sites, and from the rich
paintings and mosaics of the baths of Titus and Caracalla, it is not
difficult to form an idea of their original splendour.
It is not a little significant of what their rich decoration must
have been to note that such marvels of statuary as the Laocoon, the
Farnese Bull, and the Gladiators have been discovered within them.
Besides the necessary administrative rooms, these buildings
generally contained a frigidarium or cold bath, a tepidarium or warm
bath, and a sudatorium, circular in form and covered in by a dome. The
walls, built of brick, were pierced with niches and supported high cross
and barrel vaults of immense span. It has been conjectured that the
Pantheon was the entrance hall of the baths of Agrippa, the porch having
been added at a later period when the building was converted into a
temple.
The chief commemorative structures were triumphal arches and votive
columns. The former were of two kinds, having either one main arched
opening, or a large central arch for vehicles and two lower ones on
either side for foot passengers. The arch of Titus in Rome is an
example of the first, its main arch being flanked by composite columns,
supporting a richly carved entablature, which is in turn surmounted by
an attic, inscribed with the dedication to the conqueror by the Senate
and Roman people. The bassi relievi employed in its decoration represent
the sacking of Jerusalem by Titus; a specially notable feature among
the spoils depicted being the golden candelabra with the seven sockets,
mentioned in Scripture history.
The arches of Constantine and Septimius Severus are of the second
category. They are covered with rich sculpture and are of very beautiful
proportion. Famous arches are those of Orange in the south of France,
Beneventum, Ancona, Rimini, Pola, and Athens. Everywhere,
in fact, where a victory was to be commemorated, or the termination of a
great military road to be marked, it was customary to erect an arch.
Another method of paying homage to great men was to erect columns
surmounted by their statues. The columns of Trajan and Antoninus in
Rome are especially remarkable. The former is the higher and of the
best workmanship. The pedestal upon which it rests is ornamented with
elaborate carvings representing the arms of conquered nations, and is
enriched at the four upper corners of its cornice by imperial eagles with
garlands suspended between them. A wreath replaces the torus or round
mould at the base of the column, and around the shaft is wound a ribbon
of sculpture, representing a triumphal procession, which terminates
at the capital. Isolated columns were also often employed for the
inscription of legal notices, as boundary-marks, or for marking military
limits.
The gates at the entrances of the principal cities were similar to the
triumphal arches. There are two especially fine examples in France, those
of Autun and Treves. In these the attic story is replaced by a gallery
connecting the two flanking wings, which are several stories in height,
and contain chambers which it is commonly supposed were used as courts of
justice.
Roman camps were regulated and arranged with military
precision, and were of two descriptions. The one, erected for temporary
use, was defended by a rude palisade of branches and a ditch, the other,
the “castra hiberna,” or winter quarters, was generally a permanent
structure, built of brick, containing within a square enclosure the
barracks, workshops, hospitals, and other necessary buildings. This
enclosure was divided by cross-roads, passing through gates in the outer
wall. The gate facing the enemy was called the porta prætoria, hence
prætorian camp.
Necrological monuments were built in various forms, from the simple
tablet to the immense mausoleums of the emperors. Just without the walls
of Rome are still to be seen the remains of the sepulchre of Caius
Sestius, a large pyramid containing a chamber several feet above the
ground level. Farther out, on the Appian Way, is the tomb of Cæcilia
Metella, a cylindrical structure upon a square base, of considerable
magnitude. The exterior is simple, the only decoration being a series of
ox-skulls in the frieze. This building was probably originally surmounted
by an earthen cone, after the manner of the Etruscan tombs.
The tomb of Augustus was constructed in a similar manner but on a larger
scale. The entrance was preceded by a porch and the exterior walls
contained niches. The conical mound above was planted with trees and
shrubbery.
The Scipios were buried in stone sarcophagi in a subterranean
chamber, which has been but recently discovered.
A curious monument was that of the Horatii, consisting of a rectangular
block of masonry, containing the sepulchre, surmounted by four stone
cones, grouped around a fifth and higher one. These probably had a
symbolical meaning, as a similar structure, called the tomb of Porsenna,
is said to have existed in Etruria.
By far the most magnificent building of the kind was the Mausoleum, or
Mole of Hadrian, the ruins of which now go by the name of the Castel St.
Angelo. The tomb rose conspicuously on the banks above the Tiber, on
a square foundation; its two upper stories were circular in plan, and
decorated with colonnades and statuary, and the whole was capped by an
immense roof, terminated by a pineapple of bronze.
The tombs of St. Helena and St. Costanza were circular structures similar
to that of Cæcilia Metella, the cone of earth, however, being replaced by
a dome. The interior of the tomb of St. Costanza was divided by columns
which sustained a vault connecting with the outer wall.
The practice of burning bodies and preserving their ashes gave rise also
to the building of columbariums, rectangular structures containing in
their walls receptacles for funereal urns.
In the valley of Jerusalem the hypogee was the form of sepulchre commonly
adopted, its entrance being decorated with a colonnade of
one of the Roman orders.
Basilicas were the law courts of the Roman people and places of assembly
for the transaction of their daily affairs. On the exterior, these
buildings were surrounded by numerous courts and porticos, where the
merchants assembled daily to discuss their affairs or to await the result
of the trials conducted within. In the interior they contained a large
hall or nave flanked by side aisles, preceding a transept or further room
which was terminated by a semicircular apse. This apse was occupied by
the magistrate while presiding in the cases submitted to his decision.
The ruins of the basilicas of Titus and Maxentius remain, at the present
day, in sufficient preservation to show that in the one a flat ceiling
of timber was employed, and in the other a system of intersecting vaults
similar in construction to those of the baths of Caracalla. There are
traces of several ancient buildings of this kind, but it is supposed that
many were pulled down by the Christians, who erected churches on their
sites, using the old basilica as their model.
The plan was, in reality, but an improvement on that of the Roman temple,
the side aisles and transepts being naturally developed additions to the
older cella to which the apse had been added previously in many examples.
The great administrative power governing the erection of
the buildings of Rome was one of the most remarkable features connected
with them. Architecture with the Romans was a means to an end, this
end being the construction of edifices suiting their requirements and
their desire for display. No scope was allowed for individual talent or
ingenuity, unless employed in the carrying out of a distinct programme,
laid down by those in power; each building forming part of a great
scheme, prevailing throughout the conquered world.
In Greece architectural works were produced in the different cities and
states under the guidance of independent artists, with the co-operation
of their fellow-citizens who were eager to attain the true principles
of art; in Rome and the Roman world, art was entirely subservient to a
system of politics which ran through all departments.