Reading 2 (Munro, Art and Architecture)

Introduction

• The study of Roman art and architecture relies predominantly on material evidence: remains of buildings and objects recovered by archaeologists and, to a lesser extent, collectors. Our understanding is limited because not all materials survive (e.g., wood and textiles are rarely preserved).
• The focus tends to be on: buildings and their decoration; objects made of stone, plaster, or ceramic; and, to a lesser extent, metal or glass.
• Early excavations (e.g., Pompeii) reflected collecting biases (e.g., preference for marble), which shaped later scholarship.
• Roman art and architecture are part of the broader category of material culture: objects and structures created to facilitate activities, reflect preferences, and perpetuate habits of a community.
• Traditional approaches emphasized describing forms and styles; more recent work investigates how, why, and by whom objects and buildings were made, revealing resources, workforce organization, and the economy of Rome.
• Emperors commissioned much material culture, making art and architecture politically motivated; e.g., their images disseminated through statues, busts, coins, and monumental architecture.
• The Empire’s reach across multiple architectural genres (arches, temples, fora) helped establish and maintain control over territories.
• The study bridges questions of meaning and function with production processes, resources, and economic implications.
• Important caveat: our knowledge is always partial; future discoveries can revise understandings of Roman art and architecture.

Defining Romanness and Early Influences

• Early influences on Roman culture came from indigenous Italic groups (notably the Etruscans) and later from Greek culture.
• Etruscan influence example: Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline Hill shows architectural ideas possibly derived from Etruscan temple design (rectangular podium, stairs on one short side, fronted by a wooden porch and statues resembling Apollo of Veii).
• Italians traded with Greeks; Greek red-figure pottery found in Etruscan tombs indicates contact and exchange.
• Beginning in the 8th century BCE, Greek posts and colonies in southern Italy and Sicily meant Greek material culture was well known in Italy before Rome’s rise.
• After Rome defeated Greece in the 2nd century BCE, imports of Greek styles and materials surged due to peaceful contact, Greek artists moving to Rome (slaves and free), and looting of conquered territories by the Roman army.
• Public and private collections absorbed these imported styles and subjects, shaping Roman taste and production (e.g., the Alexander Mosaic copied from a Greek 4th-century BCE work).
• Pompeii wall paintings and mosaics illustrate the growing Greek influence in domestic and public spaces (e.g., Macellum wall paintings with single scenes from Greek myths; these may reflect cultural or moral guidance for workers, slaves, and non-elites).
• Greek influence extended to temple architecture in the late Republic: marble imported from Greece used as building material; temples used Greek orders (e.g., Ionic) in Rome, sometimes replacing Italic orders.
• Examples:
  • Pseudo-peripteral Temple of Portunus (c. 100 BCE) in the Forum Boarium: Italic podium with Ionic decorative elements.
  • Round Temple in the Forum Boarium: 18 Corinthian columns made of imported white Greek marble on a circular podium; import of Greek marble symbolized wealth and admiration for Greek technique.
• Verism emerges in late Republic portrait sculpture: realistic depictions with individual features and signs of age, contrasting with idealized Greek sculpture.
• Verism theories:
  • Theory 1: Verism developed in response to emphasis on family ancestry; wax ancestor masks (imagines) led to marble/bronze statues in the likeness of ancestors (demonstrating family likeness).
  • Theory 2: Veristic portraits symbolized client-patron relationships: depicting patrons with aged features underscored social status and loyalty of clients who supported patrons in politics and business.
• Verism as a distinctive Roman trait sets Roman sculpture apart from imported Greek works.

Concrete and Architectural Innovation in the Republic

• Major Republic innovation: concrete (lime-based mortar + pozzolana + aggregate).
• Advantages of concrete:
  • Sets underwater; enables harbours and aqueducts.
  • Durable and stable; suitable for curved features and vaulted spaces.
  • Cheaper and faster than importing quarried stone blocks.
• Early extensive use of concrete vaulting is visible in:
  • Porticus Aemilia (193 BCE) in Rome: a long storage hall on the Tiber calm with a sequence of concrete vaults adapting to a sloping riverbank.
  • Sanctuary of Fortuna at Praeneste (Praeneste = modern Palestrina): tiered platforms leading up to a temple on a hillside, with concrete vaulting visible in the terraces.
• The rise of concrete allowed Romans to experiment with spatial organization beyond Greek precedents and to rely on locally sourced materials.

Augustus: Image of Empire and the Turn to a Unified Roman Style

• Under Augustus, art and architecture moved toward a singular, self-confident Roman style, serving political propaganda and imperial ideology.
• The Emperor’s image is disseminated through sculpture and coinage, shifting away from verism toward a youthful, timeless depiction of power.
• Representation of Augustus as a young man appears in multiple statues and is associated with religious and political roles (pontifex maximus, military commander).
• Livia’s portraiture: youthful depictions with distinctive facial features (large almond-shaped eyes; central node of hair). These features help identify Livia across works.
• Imperial family portraiture is prominent in public monuments, emphasizing the family unit as central to political stability and prosperity after civil war.
• Ara Pacis (Altar of Peace, 13–9 BCE) is a key monument in Campus Martius; its relief panels depict imperial family members and mytho-historical scenes, signaling fecundity and regeneration.
  • Tellus panel interpretation debated but often linked to fertility and abundance.
  • Romulus panel depicts Rome’s founder with Faustulus and Mars.
• The Ara Pacis site includes a monumental obelisk (obelisk height in Campus Martius: 22 m) transported from Egypt to symbolize imperial domination and mathematical precision.
• The Forum of Augustus embodies Augustus’s reform and power; adjacent to Forum of Julius Caesar, linking Augustus to Julius Caesar.
• Temple of Mars Ultor stands at the Forum of Augustus’s north end, memorializing Augustus’s vengeance against Brutus and Cassius.
• Augustus supported orthogonal city planning; he divided Rome into 14 regions; restructured Campus Martius; restored temples; introduced Luna marble (Carrara) as a domestic-expressive material for exterior and capitals; interior mixing with colored marbles from Africa to signal imperial wealth and control of resources.
• The Roman Corinthian order emerges as a distinctly Roman adaptation, evolving from earlier Greek Corinthian features with refined entablature and new details (e.g., modillions on the cornice).
  • Temple of Mars Ultor provides a key example of the refined Roman Corinthian order.
• Other important imperial materials and works:
  • Luxury wares: Portland Vase (cameo glass, 5–25 CE) made by the dip overlay method; ornate decoration showing mythological or allegorical scenes.
  • Boscoreale Cups (silver): depict Augustus and Tiberius in military and religious contexts; show how private pieces could combine historical and allegorical scenes to convey imperial messages.
  • These pieces illustrate both public propaganda and private wealth in the early empire.

Imperial Dynasties, Dominance, and Major Public Projects

• After Augustus, emperors used monumental architecture to demonstrate power and piety, and sometimes to foster megalomania (e.g., Nero’s Domus Aurea).
• Nero and the Domus Aurea (Golden House): post-Great Fire (64 CE) bulk of Rome’s private urban space was rebuilt as a lavish palace complex spanning parts of the Caelian, Palatine, and Esquiline hills; a self-contained world of luxury with a center containing a large garden and an early concrete dome (one of the earliest domes in Rome).
• The Great Fire of 64 CE and its aftermath: accusations and controversy about Nero’s role; the Domus Aurea’s scale demonstrated imperial domination yet its demolition began under Nero’s successor to make way for public projects (68 CE).
• The Colosseum (Flavian Amphitheatre): initiated by Vespasian and inaugurated by Titus in 80 CE; an enormous public entertainment venue on the Roman Forum’s eastern side.
  • Exterior: arches on three levels plus a fourth wall level with openings; interior vaults and subterranean passageways for seating and movement.
  • Capacity about 55,000; seating arranged by social status: ima cavea (officials/aristocracy) near the arena, summa cavea (poorer citizens) at the top, with middle sections for other classes.
• The Palatine Palace (imperial residence on the Palatine Hill) expanded and renovated under the Flavians, focusing on luxury for emperors and entertaining guests; continued development under Trajan and Hadrian, with more expansion under later Severan dynasty.
• Pantheon (Hadrianic rebuild): originally built by Marcus Agrippa in Augustus’s era; rebuilt under Trajan and Hadrian, culminating in the structure known today as the Pantheon.
  • Key features: circular dome with a rectangular porch; dome diameter 43.2 m and height 21.6 m; oculus at the crown reduces weight and allows light to enter; dome construction uses heavier aggregate at the bottom and lighter materials at the top to maintain stability; thickness tapers upward to reduce mass; structural and mechanical mastery demonstrated by the oculus and weight-management strategies.
  • The porch being shortened to accommodate Egyptian granite columns demonstrates practical problem-solving in imperial building projects.
• Arch of Titus: earliest monument to employ spatial illusionism in relief, with panels showing triumphal procession and plunder from the Jewish Temple; figures protrude and recede to create movement and engage viewers beneath the arch.
• Trajan’s Column: 38 m tall column in the Forum of Trajan with over 2,500 figures in 55 scenes; high-relief narrative spirals upward; Trajan is depicted in many scenes addressing troops, overseeing works, and receiving captives; emphasis on engineering, religious sacrifice, and presence of the emperor in military life rather than purely battle scenes.
• Column of Marcus Aurelius: similar commemorative purpose but different depiction; high-relief figures with violent battles against Germanic tribes; 116 scenes; 36 depict battles; emphasizes the horrors of war because Rome defended against attackers during a defensive war.
• Portrait sculpture evolution in the Imperial era:
  • Flavian period: use of drills to create women’s hair (e.g., Flavian Woman bust with deep-set curls and a hairpiece).
  • Hadrian’s era: introduction of full beards and voluminous, curly hair; eye treatment becomes more structured: iris border incised, pupils drilled instead of painted, enabling a clearer gaze.
• Hadrian’s Villa at Tivoli (c. 125–128 CE): a large imperial retreat about 30 km east of Rome, spanning around 1 km2 with over 30 buildings including two bath complexes, Maritime Theatre, dining rooms, reception halls, service quarters, and numerous peristyle courtyards.
  • Decor and materials reflect wealth and taste: imported Greek and North African marble; mosaics; opus sectile panels; marble veneers; copies of Hellenistic statues; statues of the imperial family and Antinous (Hadrian’s lover) including a statue of Antinous in Egyptian attire as a Pharaoh.
  • Architect Apollodorus of Damascus (Forum and Markets of Trajan) criticized Hadrian’s drawings of “pumpkins” (debate about whether he referred to domes or floor-plan forms). Regardless, Hadrian’s villa demonstrates his active interest in architecture and his patronage of Greek-influenced forms (e.g., the Poikile peristyle courtyard named after Athens’ Stoa Poikile).
• Private and provincial architectural practice reveals diversity in style, scale, and function across the empire.

Private Wealth, Villas, and Provincial Architecture

• Not all Roman art and architecture was imperial propaganda; ordinary people commissioned works or built villas to reflect wealth, taste, and utility.
• Villas (pars rustica vs pars urbana): two main components—production facilities (stables, workshops, presses, storage) and residential spaces (dining rooms, baths, libraries, offices).
• Architectural patterns often mimic urban houses but scaled up; villas around courtyards or linked by wings; layout adapted to agricultural production and regional landscape.
• Scale and design vary by wealth and region:
  • British villas (e.g., Rockbourne, Hampshire) often two or three wings around an open courtyard; smaller baths and narrower layouts.
  • Provincial villas in Spain and Gaul used local materials; Baelo Claudia’s basilica columns made from local limestone with stucco to imitate marble; Sao Cucufate in Portugal used bricks and local granite.
  • In Italy, ubiquitous use of local limestone in villas; imported marble more common in imperial fora and major buildings, reflecting wealth and access to empire resources.
• Differences reflect resource access, geography, and economy, not just taste.
• The architecture of provincial cities shows a trend toward imitating Roman urban planning, yet adapting to local environments and resources.
• The builders’ resourcefulness is evident in techniques like stucco to simulate marble where actual marble was scarce or expensive.
• Vitruvius, On Architecture (Box 17.4) provides early Roman guidance on villa orientation, farm-scale adequacy, and functional planning: baths connected to kitchens for worker sanitation; oil-presses adjacent to kitchens for efficient harvest processing.

Material Reuse, Spolia, and Later Empire

• From the chaotic third century CE onward, spolia (reused decorative elements from earlier structures) become common in new construction.
• Evidence of marbles being reused in Pompeii appears in earlier periods, but reuse becomes more pronounced in the later empire (e.g., Hadrianic panels reused on the Arch of Constantine).
• Possible reasons for spolia:
  • To associate current rulers with successful predecessors; or
  • To signal austerity or respond to rising costs; or
  • Replacement of expensive or scarce new material with reclaimed older pieces.
• Reuse and recycling extend beyond high-profile works; amphorae and other containers were repurposed in large-scale projects (e.g., Circus of Maxentius).
• In the fourth century CE, inscriptions and inscriptions-in-stone resource were repurposed for new architecture and monuments.
• The tetrarchy (Diocletian’s system of shared rule) reflects political instability: two emperors (Augustus) and two junior emperors (Caesars) across eastern and western halves; their iconography uses frontal gaze and nearly identical pairs, with less facial individuality.
• The frontality and lack of individual facial features in tetrarchic sculpture became a formal convention that continued into the Byzantine period.
• The opus sectile panel of Junius Bassus (c. 359 CE) shows the abrupt adoption of frontal gaze and the consolidation of a new aesthetic in late antique art.
• The rise of Christianity in art becomes more visible in the late Roman world: new religious imagery appears in private contexts and catacombs; sarcophagi and domestic wall paintings begin to depict biblical scenes; Dura-Europos and Hinton St. Mary provide early examples of Christian imagery in domestic and communal settings.

Christianity and Late Antique Transformations in Art

• The late empire sees the introduction and growing prominence of Christian scenes in art.
• Catacombs in Rome (3rd century CE onward) display Christ figures and biblical scenes; sarcophagi such as Junius Bassus portray Genesis narratives (e.g., Adam and Eve).
• Early domestic Christian imagery appears in Dura-Europos (Syria, ca. 235 CE) and Hinton St. Mary (Britain), demonstrating the spread of Christian iconography beyond elite spaces.
• These images illustrate a major social and religious shift across the empire, and indicate how private and domestic spaces could reflect new religious practices.
• Unclear whether widespread worship occurred in homes as pagan cults did, but the public visibility of Christian imagery increases over time.

Summary: Trends, Continuities, and Conditions

• Over about six centuries, Roman art and architecture evolve from republican collecting and imitation to a mature, dominant material presence across the empire.
• Key motifs persist: Greek myth in wall painting and mosaic continues into the fifth century CE.
• Hadrian’s era marks a resurgence of Greek-influenced architectural design and a revival of Hellenistic art forms.
• The portrayal of individuals moves between realism and idealism, often aligned with propaganda needs.
• The variety of media and styles reflects imperial taste, personal wealth, local resources, and broader economic conditions.
• The material culture of the Romans is also a lens for studying the economy: quarries, workshops, and home production reveal production scales and distribution dynamics.
• Ongoing discoveries and reinterpretations mean modern understanding continues to change; new evidence informs debates about ancient economies and artistic practices.

Questions for Review and Discussion

• How was Roman material culture influenced by the Etruscans and Greeks?
• Why was age an important feature in portraiture? What social or political gain could be achieved by portraying someone as young or old?
• Why is the dome important to Roman architecture?
• How does art from the middle and lower classes differ from imperial art in terms of purpose, materials, and scale?

Primary Sources and References (selected)

• Box 17.1: Plutarch, Life of Aemilius Paullus, 32.2.1 (on triumphs and political power).
• Box 17.2: Augustus, The Deeds of the Divine Augustus, 27–8 (on imperial expansion and governance).
• Box 17.3: Nero and the Great Fire of 64 CE (Tacitus, Suetonius references; Domus Aurea as statement of power; conflict with public land use).
• Box 17.4: Vitruvius, On Architecture, 6.6.1–2 (villa orientation and farm-scale planning).
• Figures and monuments discussed include: Ara Pacis, Augustus of Prima Porta, Temple of Mars Ultor, Porticus Aemilia, Temple of Portunus, Round Temple, Pantheon, Trajan’s Column, Column of Marcus Aurelius, Arch of Titus, Hadrian’s Villa, Canopus at Tivoli, Serapeum, Antinous imagery, and the Portland Vase.

Key Dates and Figures (selected, with LaTeX formatting)

• Earliest use of Roman concrete: 193\,\text{BCE} (Porticus Aemilia, Rome)
• Concrete dome in Nero’s Domus Aurea: 65-68\,\text{CE}
• Colosseum inaugurated: 80\,\text{CE}
• Hadrian’s Pantheon rebuilding: approximately 118-125\,\text{CE}
• Porticus Aemilia vaulting tradition: earliest extensive use of concrete vaulting: 193\,\text{BCE}
• Trajan’s Column: height 38\,\text{m} (column height) with over 2{,}500 figures in 55 scenes
• Trajan’s Column narrative: spiral with emperor appearing about 60 times
• Pantheon dome: diameter 43.2\,\text{m}, height 21.6\,\text{m}; oculus for weight relief and illumination
• Arch of Titus relief panels: spatial illusionism in high relief
• Colosseum seating capacity: approximately 55{,}000
• Hadrian’s Villa: about 1\,\text{km}^2 with more than 30 buildings
• Portland Vase dating: 5-25\,\text{CE}

Connections to broader themes

• Cultural exchange and hybridity in Roman art reflect political and military expansion.
• The shift from verism to youthful imperial imagery mirrors changing political narratives from republic to empire.
• The use of concrete enables new architectural forms (domes, vaults) and large-scale public entertainment and religious buildings.
• Private wealth accelerates the diffusion of luxury goods and classical motifs into domestic settings, illustrating social stratification and consumption.
• Spolia demonstrates political memory, prestige, and economic pragmatism in late antique construction.
• The gradual Christianization of visual culture marks a major shift in the empire’s religious and civic identity.

Connections to Previous Lectures / Foundational Principles

• Greek influence vs. Italic (Etruscan) foundations:
  • Early cross-cultural borrowing and adaptation set the stage for Roman architectural vocabulary.
  • Verism aligns with Roman social values (ancestry, lineage, and social networks).
• Materiality and production:
  • The study of stone, plaster, ceramic, and metal artifacts reveals production scales, resource distribution, and economic organization across the empire.
  • The role of monumental architecture as political messaging aligns with theories of state power and propaganda in ancient societies.
• Engineering as a cultural achievement:
  • Roman mastery of concrete and vaulting underpins their ability to realize vast public works, with lasting influence on Western architectural practices.

Practical and Ethical Implications Discussed

• Modern interpretations of Roman art are shaped by biases in literary sources and by the availability of material evidence; critical reassessment is ongoing.
• The visibility of imperial power through architecture raises questions about the manipulation of public space and memory in ancient societies.
• The emergence of Christian imagery in late antiquity invites discussion about religious transformation and cultural change within a dominant imperial framework.
• The study of material culture offers insight into economic systems, trade networks, and labor organization, highlighting the linkage between art, economy, and governance.

Formatted Notes: Quick Reference Blocks

• Key innovations: concrete (early use: 193\,\text{BCE}), arches and vaults, Roman Corinthian order development, and extensive use of imported Greek marble.
• Major monuments and dates: Porta Portunus (c. 100\,\text{BCE}), Round Temple (c. 2nd\,\century\,\BCE), Pantheon reconstruction (c. AD 100-200), Arch of Titus (c. AD 81-82), Trajan’s and Marcus Aurelius’ columns (2nd c. CE).
• Portrait evolution: verism in republic; Hadrian’s beard and scholarly influence; eye detailing (drilled pupils).
• Villa architecture: pars rustica vs pars urbana; regional material variation; stucco as marble substitute.
• Late antique transition: tetrarchy, frontal iconography, Christian imagery in sarcophagi and domestic settings.

Suggested Readings (as listed in notes)

• MacDonald, W. 1982. The Architecture of the Roman Empire, I and II. Yale University Press.
• MacDonald, J.W. 2005. The Architecture of Roman Temples: The Republic to the Middle Empire. Cambridge University Press.
• Kleiner, F. 2007. A History of Roman Art. Cengage.
• Wilson-Jones, M. 2000. Principles of Roman Architecture. Yale University Press.
• Stewart, P. 2008. The Social History of Roman Art. Cambridge University Press.
• Elsner, J. 1998. Imperial Rome and Christian Triumph: The Art of the Roman Empire AD 100-450. Oxford University Press.