DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.42778#0194
ii8 THE ARCHITECTURE OF ANCIENT ROME.
are thrust forward with no reason for their existence, since they
have nothing to support but the few inches of the entablature which
projects over them. The wall assumes its true supporting function,
and the inordinate mass of the piers is revealed with no relieving
features. Moreover, the play of light and shade becomes so pro-
nounced that it is out of all proportion to the size of the monument."
We find ourselves, in short, confronted by the beginnings of the
baroque architecture of the later Roman Empire.
Reference has been made in Chapter IV to the most important
archway in Syria which probably belongs to the period of Hadrian
(Curtis p. 56), viz., that which was erected to form the junction
between the main colonnaded street and that leading to the Propy-
laea of the Temple of the Sun at Palmyra ; throughout the country,
however, in every town built by the Romans, entrance gateways
are found which in their design resemble Arches of Triumph, but
were built to give more importance to the entrance to a town or
to some temple. The sculpture is, however confined to the capitals
and bases of the engaged columns with which they are decorated,
or, as at Petra, to the pilasters on each side of the principal archways.
The arch at Timgad, though generally attributed to Trajan, more
probably belongs, as Curtis thinks, to the period of Marcus Aurelius.
It has three openings, the central arch being much larger than the
two lateral ones ; over them are rectangular niches flanked by small
supported columns on projecting corbels, while the main entablature
is supported by four unfluted Corinthian pilasters, in front of each
of which, on the same high pedestal, is a detached fluted Corinthian
column. Each pair of these columns supports a curved pediment
which is carried over the space above the lateral niches (Plate LIX).
It is more elaborate than the great majority of the numerous
triumphal arches of N. Africa, where the absence of sculpture is very
noticeable. There is, however, a little on the recently restored
Arch of Marcus Aurelius at Tripoli.
The most remarkable example in the country is the quadifrontal
Arch of Caracalla at Tebessa (Theveste), which was probably erected,
like the Arch of Janus in Rome, at the intersection of two streets.
It consists of a single archway (Plate LIV) on each front, flanked by
pairs of Corinthian columns raised on pedestals. The frieze is made
of unusual depth, so as to allow of space for inscriptions, and it is,
perhaps, in consequence of this that no attic storey was provided.
On the other hand, in its place, and still existing over the north
are thrust forward with no reason for their existence, since they
have nothing to support but the few inches of the entablature which
projects over them. The wall assumes its true supporting function,
and the inordinate mass of the piers is revealed with no relieving
features. Moreover, the play of light and shade becomes so pro-
nounced that it is out of all proportion to the size of the monument."
We find ourselves, in short, confronted by the beginnings of the
baroque architecture of the later Roman Empire.
Reference has been made in Chapter IV to the most important
archway in Syria which probably belongs to the period of Hadrian
(Curtis p. 56), viz., that which was erected to form the junction
between the main colonnaded street and that leading to the Propy-
laea of the Temple of the Sun at Palmyra ; throughout the country,
however, in every town built by the Romans, entrance gateways
are found which in their design resemble Arches of Triumph, but
were built to give more importance to the entrance to a town or
to some temple. The sculpture is, however confined to the capitals
and bases of the engaged columns with which they are decorated,
or, as at Petra, to the pilasters on each side of the principal archways.
The arch at Timgad, though generally attributed to Trajan, more
probably belongs, as Curtis thinks, to the period of Marcus Aurelius.
It has three openings, the central arch being much larger than the
two lateral ones ; over them are rectangular niches flanked by small
supported columns on projecting corbels, while the main entablature
is supported by four unfluted Corinthian pilasters, in front of each
of which, on the same high pedestal, is a detached fluted Corinthian
column. Each pair of these columns supports a curved pediment
which is carried over the space above the lateral niches (Plate LIX).
It is more elaborate than the great majority of the numerous
triumphal arches of N. Africa, where the absence of sculpture is very
noticeable. There is, however, a little on the recently restored
Arch of Marcus Aurelius at Tripoli.
The most remarkable example in the country is the quadifrontal
Arch of Caracalla at Tebessa (Theveste), which was probably erected,
like the Arch of Janus in Rome, at the intersection of two streets.
It consists of a single archway (Plate LIV) on each front, flanked by
pairs of Corinthian columns raised on pedestals. The frieze is made
of unusual depth, so as to allow of space for inscriptions, and it is,
perhaps, in consequence of this that no attic storey was provided.
On the other hand, in its place, and still existing over the north