DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.42778#0094
50 THE ARCHITECTURE OF ANCIENT ROME.
to centre of the columns in the Colosseum is seven and a half dia-
meters, the Doric column is nine and one-third diameters high, and
the Ionic and Corinthian eight and three-quarters only, all having
the same diameter at the base.
The Romans failed to grasp the true principle of decoration,
that it should emphasise and not obscure structural function.
Their artistic handling of space is unsurpassed, but they always
tended in the direction of more extravagant enrichment. Thus
free columns were often employed (as in the Forums of Nerva and
Trajan) and in triumphal arches to support a projecting block
round which the mouldings of the entablature were returned.
In the interpretation of the orders by the Italian Revivalists,
they would seem to have assumed that no order, in conjunction
with an arcade, was complete without a pedestal. There is no
example of this feature in the Doric order in Rome, and that of
the Ionic order in the Theatre of Marcellus and in the Colosseum
is part of a plinth which was required to give height for the
vaulting of the lower storey; but they were not detached
features as shown in Vignola and Palladio. There is, however,
one well-known example in the temple of Minerva at Assisi
(Plate XXIX) where, to give additional width to the road
passing in front, the steps are set back between pedestals carrying
the columns of the main front. In North Africa, the columns
decorating the front of the Prsetorium at Lambaesis are raised on
pedestals, and in Syria are other examples, as in the Prsetorium at
Mousmieh (now destroyed), the so-called temple at Sunamein,
south of Damascus (Plate XXX), the temple of Kanawat in
Hauran, the temple of Neptune at Palmyra and the Propylsea at
Baalbek.
In the Roman triumphal arches pedestals were required on
account of the height of the central archway, but they vary so
much in relation of their height to those of the columns they carry,
that no rules could be applied to them as part of the order. Thus,
in the Arches of Titus, Septimius Severus and Constantine, the rela-
tion is as 2 : 5 ; at Beneventum 2:4; at Tebessa 2:4!; at Orange
2:8; and at Ancont 2 : 9§.
to centre of the columns in the Colosseum is seven and a half dia-
meters, the Doric column is nine and one-third diameters high, and
the Ionic and Corinthian eight and three-quarters only, all having
the same diameter at the base.
The Romans failed to grasp the true principle of decoration,
that it should emphasise and not obscure structural function.
Their artistic handling of space is unsurpassed, but they always
tended in the direction of more extravagant enrichment. Thus
free columns were often employed (as in the Forums of Nerva and
Trajan) and in triumphal arches to support a projecting block
round which the mouldings of the entablature were returned.
In the interpretation of the orders by the Italian Revivalists,
they would seem to have assumed that no order, in conjunction
with an arcade, was complete without a pedestal. There is no
example of this feature in the Doric order in Rome, and that of
the Ionic order in the Theatre of Marcellus and in the Colosseum
is part of a plinth which was required to give height for the
vaulting of the lower storey; but they were not detached
features as shown in Vignola and Palladio. There is, however,
one well-known example in the temple of Minerva at Assisi
(Plate XXIX) where, to give additional width to the road
passing in front, the steps are set back between pedestals carrying
the columns of the main front. In North Africa, the columns
decorating the front of the Prsetorium at Lambaesis are raised on
pedestals, and in Syria are other examples, as in the Prsetorium at
Mousmieh (now destroyed), the so-called temple at Sunamein,
south of Damascus (Plate XXX), the temple of Kanawat in
Hauran, the temple of Neptune at Palmyra and the Propylsea at
Baalbek.
In the Roman triumphal arches pedestals were required on
account of the height of the central archway, but they vary so
much in relation of their height to those of the columns they carry,
that no rules could be applied to them as part of the order. Thus,
in the Arches of Titus, Septimius Severus and Constantine, the rela-
tion is as 2 : 5 ; at Beneventum 2:4; at Tebessa 2:4!; at Orange
2:8; and at Ancont 2 : 9§.