DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.26747#0364
300
KOMAN ARCHITECTUEE.
Book VII.
ornamented by a false peristyle of three-quarter columns attaclied to
its walls.
Besides tlris the Bornans borrowed from the Etruscans a circular
foiTu of temple unknown to the Greeks, but which to their tomb-build-
ing predecessors must have been not only a familiar but a favourite
form. As used by the Bomans it was generally encircled by a peristyle
of columns, though it is not clear that the Etruscans so used it. Perhaps
this is an improvement adopted from the Greeks on an Etruscan foim.
In early tirnes these circular temples were dedicated to Yesta, Cybele,
or some god or goddess either unknown or not generaliy worshipped
by the Indo-Germanic races; but in latter times this distinction was
lost sight of.
A more important characteristic which the Bomans borrowed from
the Etruscans was the circular arch. It was known, it is true, to the
Egyptians, Assyrians, and Greeks; yet none of those people, perhaps
excepting the Assyrians, seem to have used it as a feature in their
ornamental architecture ; but the Etruscans seem to have had a pecu-
liar predilection for it, and from them the Bomans adopted it boldly,
and introduced it into almost all their buildings. It was not at first
used in temples of Grecian form, nor even in their peristylar circular
ones. In the civil buildings of the Bomans it.was a universal feature,
but generally placed in juxtaposition with the Grecian orders. In
the Colosseum, for instance, the whole construction is arched; but a
useless network of ill-designed and ill-arranged Grecian columns,
with their entablatures, is spread over the whole.. This is a curious
instance of the mixture of the two styles, and as such is very charac-
teristic of Boman art; but in an artistic point of view the place of tliese
columns would have been far better supplied by buttresses or panels,
or some more correctly constructive expedient.
After having thoroughly familiarised themselves with the foims of
the arch as an architectural feature, the Bomans made a bold stride in
advance by applying it as a vault both to the circular and rectangular
forms of buildings. The most perfect examples of this are the Basilica
of Maxentius, commonly called the Temple of Peace, and the Botunda
of the Pantheon, both, probably, of nearly tho sarne age. In these
buildings the Boman architects so completely emancipated themselves
from the trammels of former styles as to entitle them almost to claim
the invention of a new style of architecture. It would liave required
some more practice to invent details appropriate to the purpose; still
tliese two buildings are to this hour unsurpassed for boldness of con-
ception and just appreciation of the mode in which the new invention
ought to be applied. Tliis is almost universally acknowledged as far
as the interior of the Pantheon is concerned. In simple grandeur it
is as yet unequalled ; its faults are those of detail only. It is not so
easy to jiidge of the Ternple of Peace, from its ruined state ; but in so
far as we can judge from what remains, in boldness and majesty it must
have been quite equal to the other example, though it must have re-
quired more familiarity with the st.yle to manage so complicated a form
as appropriately as the simpler dome of the Pantheon.
KOMAN ARCHITECTUEE.
Book VII.
ornamented by a false peristyle of three-quarter columns attaclied to
its walls.
Besides tlris the Bornans borrowed from the Etruscans a circular
foiTu of temple unknown to the Greeks, but which to their tomb-build-
ing predecessors must have been not only a familiar but a favourite
form. As used by the Bomans it was generally encircled by a peristyle
of columns, though it is not clear that the Etruscans so used it. Perhaps
this is an improvement adopted from the Greeks on an Etruscan foim.
In early tirnes these circular temples were dedicated to Yesta, Cybele,
or some god or goddess either unknown or not generaliy worshipped
by the Indo-Germanic races; but in latter times this distinction was
lost sight of.
A more important characteristic which the Bomans borrowed from
the Etruscans was the circular arch. It was known, it is true, to the
Egyptians, Assyrians, and Greeks; yet none of those people, perhaps
excepting the Assyrians, seem to have used it as a feature in their
ornamental architecture ; but the Etruscans seem to have had a pecu-
liar predilection for it, and from them the Bomans adopted it boldly,
and introduced it into almost all their buildings. It was not at first
used in temples of Grecian form, nor even in their peristylar circular
ones. In the civil buildings of the Bomans it.was a universal feature,
but generally placed in juxtaposition with the Grecian orders. In
the Colosseum, for instance, the whole construction is arched; but a
useless network of ill-designed and ill-arranged Grecian columns,
with their entablatures, is spread over the whole.. This is a curious
instance of the mixture of the two styles, and as such is very charac-
teristic of Boman art; but in an artistic point of view the place of tliese
columns would have been far better supplied by buttresses or panels,
or some more correctly constructive expedient.
After having thoroughly familiarised themselves with the foims of
the arch as an architectural feature, the Bomans made a bold stride in
advance by applying it as a vault both to the circular and rectangular
forms of buildings. The most perfect examples of this are the Basilica
of Maxentius, commonly called the Temple of Peace, and the Botunda
of the Pantheon, both, probably, of nearly tho sarne age. In these
buildings the Boman architects so completely emancipated themselves
from the trammels of former styles as to entitle them almost to claim
the invention of a new style of architecture. It would liave required
some more practice to invent details appropriate to the purpose; still
tliese two buildings are to this hour unsurpassed for boldness of con-
ception and just appreciation of the mode in which the new invention
ought to be applied. Tliis is almost universally acknowledged as far
as the interior of the Pantheon is concerned. In simple grandeur it
is as yet unequalled ; its faults are those of detail only. It is not so
easy to jiidge of the Ternple of Peace, from its ruined state ; but in so
far as we can judge from what remains, in boldness and majesty it must
have been quite equal to the other example, though it must have re-
quired more familiarity with the st.yle to manage so complicated a form
as appropriately as the simpler dome of the Pantheon.