DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.42778#0138
8o THE ARCHITECTURE OF ANCIENT ROME.
inscription on the frieze, and the pediment also belonged to Agrippa’s
temple, and with reference to the latter, M. Chedanne made a singu-
lar discovery in the course of his minute examination. Agrippa’s
pediment, belonging to a decastyle portico, was of less pitch than the
existing pediment, and the marble blocks of its cornice re-employed
were inclined at a steeper angle ; consequently the sides of the
modillions, which originally were vertical, have a slight inclination
towards the centre of the portico.
M. Chedanne’s discovery of the actual date of the rotunda was
due to his having obtained permission to examine the brickwork
of a portion of the vault in which great cracks had appeared, and a
special scaffolding having been erected, he was able to take out
some of the bricks, which, to his surprise, bore stamps known to be
of the time of Hadrian. Further examination was then made in
other parts of the structure, in every case resulting in the discovery
of similar stamps. M. Chedanne’s researches, however, did not
end there. He had already noticed that the cracks came over one
of the rectangular chapels, and from this and other observations he
came to the conclusion that the columns forming the front of these
chapels were part of the original construction, and were not decora-
tive features inserted afterwards. These cracks necessitated the
removal of some of the stucco facing of the attic storey and revealed :
(i) that above the entablature of these columns there was an im-
mense relieving arch of similar dimensions to those over the entrance
doorway and the principal apse; (2) that above the columns were ver-
tical piers1 of brickwork rising to the soffit of this relieving arch ; and
(3) that between each of the three divisions were small discharging
arches. In a restoration made in 1747 the architect had cut through
all the central discharging arches in order to obtain a greater depth
for his niches, being unaware that they were integral portions of
the main construction. This was the origin of the cracks, which
had become so serious in 1892. Carrying his researches further,
M. Chedanne found that above the cornice of the attic storey was
a second relieving arch2 of similar size to the one below, with
vertical piers over those below, and other small discharging arches.
The wall, therefore, was vertical up to the inner coffer of the
second range, so that the vertical ribs already referred to, and the
1 The existence of vertical ribs in the dome is denied by Rivoira (Roman
Architecture, 127), see below.
2 All these relieving arches were not, as has been suggested, skin deep, but
carried back some 8 feet.
inscription on the frieze, and the pediment also belonged to Agrippa’s
temple, and with reference to the latter, M. Chedanne made a singu-
lar discovery in the course of his minute examination. Agrippa’s
pediment, belonging to a decastyle portico, was of less pitch than the
existing pediment, and the marble blocks of its cornice re-employed
were inclined at a steeper angle ; consequently the sides of the
modillions, which originally were vertical, have a slight inclination
towards the centre of the portico.
M. Chedanne’s discovery of the actual date of the rotunda was
due to his having obtained permission to examine the brickwork
of a portion of the vault in which great cracks had appeared, and a
special scaffolding having been erected, he was able to take out
some of the bricks, which, to his surprise, bore stamps known to be
of the time of Hadrian. Further examination was then made in
other parts of the structure, in every case resulting in the discovery
of similar stamps. M. Chedanne’s researches, however, did not
end there. He had already noticed that the cracks came over one
of the rectangular chapels, and from this and other observations he
came to the conclusion that the columns forming the front of these
chapels were part of the original construction, and were not decora-
tive features inserted afterwards. These cracks necessitated the
removal of some of the stucco facing of the attic storey and revealed :
(i) that above the entablature of these columns there was an im-
mense relieving arch of similar dimensions to those over the entrance
doorway and the principal apse; (2) that above the columns were ver-
tical piers1 of brickwork rising to the soffit of this relieving arch ; and
(3) that between each of the three divisions were small discharging
arches. In a restoration made in 1747 the architect had cut through
all the central discharging arches in order to obtain a greater depth
for his niches, being unaware that they were integral portions of
the main construction. This was the origin of the cracks, which
had become so serious in 1892. Carrying his researches further,
M. Chedanne found that above the cornice of the attic storey was
a second relieving arch2 of similar size to the one below, with
vertical piers over those below, and other small discharging arches.
The wall, therefore, was vertical up to the inner coffer of the
second range, so that the vertical ribs already referred to, and the
1 The existence of vertical ribs in the dome is denied by Rivoira (Roman
Architecture, 127), see below.
2 All these relieving arches were not, as has been suggested, skin deep, but
carried back some 8 feet.