DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.29898#0555
Bk. II. Ch. II.
BASILICAS.
519
Externally this basilica, like all those of its age, must have been
singularly deficient in beauty or in architectural design. The sides
were of plain unplastered brick, the windows were plain arch-headed
openings. The front alone was ornamented, and this only with two
ranges of windows somewhat larger than those at the sides, three in
each tier, into which tracery was inserted at some later period, and
between and above these, various figures and emblems were painted in
fresco on stucco laid on the brickwork. The whole was surmounted
by t-hat singular coved cornice which seems to have been universal
in Roman basilicas, though not found anywhere else that I am
aware of.
The two most interesting adjuncts to this cathedral were the two
tombs standing to the northward. According to the mediasval tra-
dition the one was the tomb of Honorius and his wives, the other the
church of St. Andrew. Their position, however, carefully centred on
the spina of the circus of ISTero, where the great apostle suffered mar-
tyrdom, seems to point to a holier and more important origin. My
own conviction is that they were erected to mark the places where the
apostle and his companions suffered. It is besides extremely irnpro-
bable that after the erection of the basilica an emperor should choose
the centre of a circus for the burying-place of himself and his family,
or that he should be permitted to choose so hallowed a spot. They are
of exactly the usual tomb-form of the age of Constantine, and of the
largest size, being each 100 ft. in diameter,
The first was destroyed by Michael Angelo, as it stood on the site
required for his northern tribune, the second by Pius VI., in 1776,
to make way for the present sacristy, and Rome thus lost, through
pure carelessness, the two oldest and most sacred edifices of the
Christian period which she possessed.
The most eastern had been so altered and overlaid, having been
long used as a sacristy,1 that it might have been difficult to restore it;
but its position and its antiquity certainly entitled it to a better fate.
St. Paul’s.
The church of San Paolo fuori le Mura was almost an exact
counterpart of St. Peter’s both in design and dimensions. The only
important variations were that the transept was made of the same
width as the central nave, or about 80 ft., and that the pillars sepa-
rating the nave from the side-aisles were joined by arches instead of by
a horizontal architrave. Both these were undoubted improvements,
the first giving space and dignity to the bema, the latter not only
‘ II Yaticano discritto da Pistolesi,’ vol. ii. pls. xxiv. xxv.
BASILICAS.
519
Externally this basilica, like all those of its age, must have been
singularly deficient in beauty or in architectural design. The sides
were of plain unplastered brick, the windows were plain arch-headed
openings. The front alone was ornamented, and this only with two
ranges of windows somewhat larger than those at the sides, three in
each tier, into which tracery was inserted at some later period, and
between and above these, various figures and emblems were painted in
fresco on stucco laid on the brickwork. The whole was surmounted
by t-hat singular coved cornice which seems to have been universal
in Roman basilicas, though not found anywhere else that I am
aware of.
The two most interesting adjuncts to this cathedral were the two
tombs standing to the northward. According to the mediasval tra-
dition the one was the tomb of Honorius and his wives, the other the
church of St. Andrew. Their position, however, carefully centred on
the spina of the circus of ISTero, where the great apostle suffered mar-
tyrdom, seems to point to a holier and more important origin. My
own conviction is that they were erected to mark the places where the
apostle and his companions suffered. It is besides extremely irnpro-
bable that after the erection of the basilica an emperor should choose
the centre of a circus for the burying-place of himself and his family,
or that he should be permitted to choose so hallowed a spot. They are
of exactly the usual tomb-form of the age of Constantine, and of the
largest size, being each 100 ft. in diameter,
The first was destroyed by Michael Angelo, as it stood on the site
required for his northern tribune, the second by Pius VI., in 1776,
to make way for the present sacristy, and Rome thus lost, through
pure carelessness, the two oldest and most sacred edifices of the
Christian period which she possessed.
The most eastern had been so altered and overlaid, having been
long used as a sacristy,1 that it might have been difficult to restore it;
but its position and its antiquity certainly entitled it to a better fate.
St. Paul’s.
The church of San Paolo fuori le Mura was almost an exact
counterpart of St. Peter’s both in design and dimensions. The only
important variations were that the transept was made of the same
width as the central nave, or about 80 ft., and that the pillars sepa-
rating the nave from the side-aisles were joined by arches instead of by
a horizontal architrave. Both these were undoubted improvements,
the first giving space and dignity to the bema, the latter not only
‘ II Yaticano discritto da Pistolesi,’ vol. ii. pls. xxiv. xxv.