DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.42778#0178
no THE ARCHITECTURE OF ANCIENT ROME.
bases, capitals, entablature, etc., were all in white marble. The
walls were lined with marble of various colours and panelled like
those of the Pantheon, up to a certain height, and above that in
white marble up to the springing of the vault. The upper portion
of the walls and the vaults were decorated in stucco with arabesque
ornament. The internal decoration of a Roman tomb may give
some idea of this ornamentation (Plate LI), for it is noticeable that
while the scale of the buildings increased, that of the decoration was
not adapted to it for some time, and indeed appears to have re
mained under the influence of the style used in the columbaria
of the early first century a.d.1 The paintings in the Golden House
of Nero, for instance, are so minute in proportion to the height of
the rooms that the details must have been invisible. As in the
larger vaults, such as those of the central hall, the inner lining
was already of tiles (for the constructive reasons given in Chapter
II), it was not possible to have the deep coffers like those con-
structed in brick in the aisles of the Basilica of Constantine. The
panels, in consequence, could not be of any depth, and were therefore
filled with glass mosaic, to accentuate the small figure subjects,
which otherwise, at their great height, would not have been distin-
guishable. Blouet contents himself with reproductions of the
panel subjects found in the Roman tombs and at Pompeii; whilst
Paulin suggests large figure subjects in mosaic (Plates LI I and
LIII)2 for both walls and vaults. The walls enclosing the Frigidar-
ium were decorated with tier above tier of niches, flanked by columns
carrying entablatures and pediments, circular as well as triangular.
The existence of these in the Thermae of Diocletian is shown by
the niches sunk in the brickwork and by the marble corbels ;
Paulin’s restoration is corroborated by the drawings of an Italian
artist of about 1475 a.d. in the Uffizi Collection, Florence, published
in the Baron de Geymuller’s work. These represent not only the
niches, but the actual decoration of the immense buttresses of the
central hall.3
Whilst in the interior of the Thermae the decorations in marble
1 See my remarks on the columbarium style in Papers of the British School
at Rome, vii, 123.
2 Plates LII and LIII are reproduced from M. Paulin’s fine work, entitled
Les Thermes de Diocletien.
3 A further corroboration of Paulin’s restoration of these buttresses will be
found in drawings by Palladio in the Burlington-Devonshire Collection, now
in the R.I.B.A., with the exception of the crowning feature, which is shown as
a solid buttress and without the canopy drawn by Paulin.
bases, capitals, entablature, etc., were all in white marble. The
walls were lined with marble of various colours and panelled like
those of the Pantheon, up to a certain height, and above that in
white marble up to the springing of the vault. The upper portion
of the walls and the vaults were decorated in stucco with arabesque
ornament. The internal decoration of a Roman tomb may give
some idea of this ornamentation (Plate LI), for it is noticeable that
while the scale of the buildings increased, that of the decoration was
not adapted to it for some time, and indeed appears to have re
mained under the influence of the style used in the columbaria
of the early first century a.d.1 The paintings in the Golden House
of Nero, for instance, are so minute in proportion to the height of
the rooms that the details must have been invisible. As in the
larger vaults, such as those of the central hall, the inner lining
was already of tiles (for the constructive reasons given in Chapter
II), it was not possible to have the deep coffers like those con-
structed in brick in the aisles of the Basilica of Constantine. The
panels, in consequence, could not be of any depth, and were therefore
filled with glass mosaic, to accentuate the small figure subjects,
which otherwise, at their great height, would not have been distin-
guishable. Blouet contents himself with reproductions of the
panel subjects found in the Roman tombs and at Pompeii; whilst
Paulin suggests large figure subjects in mosaic (Plates LI I and
LIII)2 for both walls and vaults. The walls enclosing the Frigidar-
ium were decorated with tier above tier of niches, flanked by columns
carrying entablatures and pediments, circular as well as triangular.
The existence of these in the Thermae of Diocletian is shown by
the niches sunk in the brickwork and by the marble corbels ;
Paulin’s restoration is corroborated by the drawings of an Italian
artist of about 1475 a.d. in the Uffizi Collection, Florence, published
in the Baron de Geymuller’s work. These represent not only the
niches, but the actual decoration of the immense buttresses of the
central hall.3
Whilst in the interior of the Thermae the decorations in marble
1 See my remarks on the columbarium style in Papers of the British School
at Rome, vii, 123.
2 Plates LII and LIII are reproduced from M. Paulin’s fine work, entitled
Les Thermes de Diocletien.
3 A further corroboration of Paulin’s restoration of these buttresses will be
found in drawings by Palladio in the Burlington-Devonshire Collection, now
in the R.I.B.A., with the exception of the crowning feature, which is shown as
a solid buttress and without the canopy drawn by Paulin.