DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.42778#0121
TEMPLES, BASILICAS, AND THEATRES.
69
in the Forum of Nerva, are placed at the farther end, so as to give
a larger area in front. This position has apparently ruled the
design of the plans, which must, when compared with Greek tem-
ples, be studied in conjunction with their surroundings ; and in
Rome this is even more important than with Greek temples. At
Tibur and Prseneste a whole hillside was occupied by the temple
and its accessory buildings (Plate XXXVI).
Besides the temples already referred to, there were others in
which the Romans followed Greek precedents, in that they were
isolated and enclosed in areas surrounded by porticoes ; such as the
temple of Venus in the Forum of Julius Caesar, the temples of Jupiter
and Juno in the Portico of Octavia, the temple built by Hadrian
and dedicated to Trajan to the north of Trajan’s Forum, the temple
of Hadrian, the double temple of Venus and Rome, the temple of
Peace in the Forum of Vespasian, the temple of Apollo at Pompeii,
etc.
There is still another important difference between the Greek and
Roman temples, viz., the increased size given to the cella. For
this there may have been two reasons : firstly, the Romans by
trussing the timbers of their roofs were able to roof over spans
never attempted by the Greeks ; and, secondly, the cella of the
Roman temple virtually became a museum in which the greater
part of the spoils of Greece, consisting of statues in marble and
bronze, were placed. The increased size required for the cella may
have led the Romans to adopt the pseudo-peripteral plan, in which
the cella occupies the full width of the portico, the tradition of the
peripteros being retained only in the engaged columns which are
attached to the external walls of the cella. The principal exam-
ples of this are found in the Ionic tetrastyle prostyle temple of
For tuna Virilis already referred to, and the Corinthian hexastyle
prostyle temple known as the “ Maison Carree ” at Nimes, which is
the best preserved Roman temple in existence.
The work of the time of Augustus is, as a rule, more refined in
its details than that of later times ; but there were revivals in the
time of Trajan, of Hadrian, and of the Antonines, when monuments
were produced which for splendour of conception, magnificence of
material, and vigour of execution have never been surpassed.
Reference has already been made to the materials employed in
Rome up to and during the reign of Augustus. To this Emperor
is due the increased employment of marble, which previously had
69
in the Forum of Nerva, are placed at the farther end, so as to give
a larger area in front. This position has apparently ruled the
design of the plans, which must, when compared with Greek tem-
ples, be studied in conjunction with their surroundings ; and in
Rome this is even more important than with Greek temples. At
Tibur and Prseneste a whole hillside was occupied by the temple
and its accessory buildings (Plate XXXVI).
Besides the temples already referred to, there were others in
which the Romans followed Greek precedents, in that they were
isolated and enclosed in areas surrounded by porticoes ; such as the
temple of Venus in the Forum of Julius Caesar, the temples of Jupiter
and Juno in the Portico of Octavia, the temple built by Hadrian
and dedicated to Trajan to the north of Trajan’s Forum, the temple
of Hadrian, the double temple of Venus and Rome, the temple of
Peace in the Forum of Vespasian, the temple of Apollo at Pompeii,
etc.
There is still another important difference between the Greek and
Roman temples, viz., the increased size given to the cella. For
this there may have been two reasons : firstly, the Romans by
trussing the timbers of their roofs were able to roof over spans
never attempted by the Greeks ; and, secondly, the cella of the
Roman temple virtually became a museum in which the greater
part of the spoils of Greece, consisting of statues in marble and
bronze, were placed. The increased size required for the cella may
have led the Romans to adopt the pseudo-peripteral plan, in which
the cella occupies the full width of the portico, the tradition of the
peripteros being retained only in the engaged columns which are
attached to the external walls of the cella. The principal exam-
ples of this are found in the Ionic tetrastyle prostyle temple of
For tuna Virilis already referred to, and the Corinthian hexastyle
prostyle temple known as the “ Maison Carree ” at Nimes, which is
the best preserved Roman temple in existence.
The work of the time of Augustus is, as a rule, more refined in
its details than that of later times ; but there were revivals in the
time of Trajan, of Hadrian, and of the Antonines, when monuments
were produced which for splendour of conception, magnificence of
material, and vigour of execution have never been surpassed.
Reference has already been made to the materials employed in
Rome up to and during the reign of Augustus. To this Emperor
is due the increased employment of marble, which previously had