Rome guide services carlo papini

smsmaarrtthistoryhistory

. . . G U I D E T O . . .

ANCIENT ROMAN

ART

Smarthistory guide to Ancient Roman Art

Smarthistory guide to Ancient Roman Art

DR. JESSICA LEAY AMBLER, DR. DARIUS ARYA, DR. JEFFREY A.

BECKER, DR. LEA CLINE, DR. ANDREW FINDLEY, DR. STEVEN FINE,

DR. JULIA FISCHER, DR. VALENTINA FOLLO, DR. BERNARD

FRISCHER, DR. BETH HARRIS, DR. JACLYN NEEL, DR. ELIZABETH

MARLOWE, DR. PAUL A. RANOGAJEC, DR. LAUREL TAYLOR, DR.

FRANCESCA TRONCHIN, AND DR. STEVEN ZUCKER

Smarthistory ● Brooklyn

Smarthistory guide to Ancient Roman Art by Dr. Jessica Leay Ambler, Dr. Darius Arya, Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker, Dr. Lea Cline, Dr. Andrew Findley, Dr. Steven Fine, Dr. Julia Fischer, Dr. Valentina Follo, Dr. Bernard Frischer, Dr. Beth Harris, Dr. Jaclyn Neel, Dr. Elizabeth Marlowe, Dr. Paul A. Ranogajec, Dr. Laurel Taylor, Dr. Francesca Tronchin, and Dr. Steven Zucker is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

AP® Art History is a trademark registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse, this publication.

https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
Contents

xi About Smarthistory

xiii Editors

xv Map

Part I. An introduction to the art of Ancient Rome

1. Introduction to ancient Roman art 3 Dr. Jessica Leay Ambler

2. The classical orders of architecture 9 Dr. Jessica Leay Ambler

3. Damnatio memoriae—Roman sanctions against memory 13 Dr. Francesca Tronchin

4. Digging through time A conversation

19 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Darius Arya

5. Pompeii, an introduction 21 Dr. Francesca Tronchin

6. The rediscovery of Pompeii and the other cities of Vesuvius 27 Dr. Francesca Tronchin

7. An introduction to ancient Roman architecture 33 Dr. Jessica Leay Ambler

8. Forum Romanum (The Roman Forum) 39 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

9. Imperial fora, Rome 45 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

v

10. Roman domestic architecture: the domus 51 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

11. Roman domestic architecture: the insula 55 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

12. Roman domestic architecture: the villa 59 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

13. Roman funeral rituals and social status: The Amiternum tomb and the tomb of the Haterii 65 Dr. Laurel Taylor

14. Looting, collecting, and exhibiting: the Bubon bronzes A conversation

69 Dr. Elizabeth Marlowe and Dr. Steven Zucker

Part II. Ancient Roman Wall Painting

15. Ancient Roman Wall Painting Styles 75 Dr. Jessica Leay Ambler

16. Painted Garden, Villa of Livia A conversation

81 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

17. Still Life with Peaches from Herculaneum 85 Dr. Lea Cline

18. Pompeii: House of the Vettii 89 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

19. Pompeii: Dionysiac frieze, Villa of Mysteries A conversation

93 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

Part III. Ancient Roman Republic

20. Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, Rome 101 Dr. Andrew Findley

21. Temple of Portunus, Rome 105 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

22. Temple of Portunus, Rome A conversation

109 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

23. Maison Carrée, Nîmes, France 113 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

vi

24. Capitoline She-wolf 117 Dr. Jaclyn Neel

25. Bronze Capitoline Brutus A conversation

121 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

26. Tomb of the Scipios and the sarcophagus of Scipio Barbatus 125 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

27. Veristic male portrait A conversation

129 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

28. Head of a Roman Patrician 131 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

Part IV. Ancient Rome: Early Empire

29. Augustus of Primaporta 135 Dr. Julia Fischer

30. Augustus of Primaporta A conversation

139 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

31. Ara Pacis Augustae (Altar of Augustan Peace) 141 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

32. Ara Pacis Augustae (Altar of Augustan Peace) A conversation

147 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

33. Dioskourides, Gemma Augustea 153 Dr. Julia Fischer

34. Preparations for a Sacrifice 157 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

35. The Colosseum (Flavian Amphitheater) A conversation

161 Dr. Beth Harris, Dr. Steven Zucker, and Dr. Valentina Follo

36. The Arch of Titus and the Roman triumph 165 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

37. The Spoils of Jerusalem, Arch of Titus A conversation

169 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Fine

vii

38. Portrait Bust of a Flavian Woman (Fonseca Bust) A conversation

173 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

39. Portrait Bust of a Flavian Woman (Fonseca Bust) A conversation

175 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Elizabeth Marlowe

40. The Forum and Markets of Trajan 179 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

41. Markets of Trajan, Rome A conversation

187 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

42. Forum of Trajan, Rome A conversation

189 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

43. Column of Trajan, Rome 191 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

44. Column of Trajan, Rome A conversation

195 Dr. Beth Harris, Dr. Steven Zucker, and Dr. Valentina Follo

Part V. Ancient Rome: Middle Empire

45. The Pantheon, Rome 201 Dr. Paul A. Ranogajec

46. The Pantheon, Rome A conversation

209 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

47. A virtual tour of Hadrian's Villa, Tivoli A conversation

213 Dr. Bernard Frischer and Dr. Beth Harris

48. Maritime Theatre at Hadrian’s Villa A conversation

217 Dr. Bernard Frischer and Dr. Beth Harris

49. Pair of Centaurs Fighting Cats of Prey from Hadrian’s Villa A conversation

219 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

viii

50. Medea Sarcophagus A conversation

223 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

51. Equestrian Sculpture of Marcus Aurelius 227 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

52. Equestrian Sculpture of Marcus Aurelius A conversation

233 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

53. The importance of the archeological findspot: The Lullingstone Busts A conversation

237 Dr. Elizabeth Marlowe and Dr. Steven Zucker

54. Severan marble plan (Forma Urbis Romae) 241 Dr. Jeffrey A. Becker

55. Ludovisi Battle Sarcophagus A conversation

245 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

Part VI. Ancient Rome: Late Empire

56. Trebonianus Gallus — emperor or athlete? A conversation

251 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Elizabeth Marlowe

57. Portraits of the Four Tetrarchs A conversation

255 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

58. Basilica of Maxentius and Constantine A conversation

259 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Darius Arya

59. The Colossus of Constantine A conversation

263 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

60. Arch of Constantine 265 Dr. Andrew Findley

61. Arch of Constantine, Rome A conversation

269 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

ix

62. The Symmachi Panel A conversation

275 Dr. Beth Harris and Dr. Steven Zucker

277 Acknowledgements

x

At Smarthistory​®​ we believe art has the power to transform lives and to build understanding across cultures. We believe that the brilliant histories of art belong to everyone, no matter their background. Smarthistory’s free, award-winning digital content unlocks the expertise of hundreds of leading scholars, making the history of art accessible and engaging to more people, in more places, than any other provider. This book is not for sale, it is distributed by Smarthistory for free.

Editors

Ruth Ezra Ruth is a doctoral candidate at Harvard University, where she specializes in the art of late-medieval and Renaissance Europe. Upon completion of her BA at Williams College, she studied in the UK on a Marshall Scholarship, earning an MPhil in history and philosophy of science from the University of Cambridge and an MA in history of art from the Courtauld Institute. A committed educator, Ruth has recently served as a Gallery Lecturer at both the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston and the National Galleries of Scotland, as well as a Teaching Fellow at Harvard.

Beth Harris, Ph.D. Beth is co-founder and executive director of Smarthistory. Previously, she was dean of art and history at Khan Academy and director of digital learning at The Museum of Modern Art, where she started MoMA Courses Online and co-produced educational videos, websites and apps. Before joining MoMA, Beth was Associate Professor of art history and director of distance learning at the Fashion Institute of Technology where she taught both online and in the classroom. She has co-authored, with Dr. Steven Zucker, numerous articles on the future of education and the future of museums, topics she regularly addresses at conferences around the world. She received her Master’s degree from the Courtauld Institute of Art in London, and her doctorate in Art History from the Graduate Center of the City University of New York.

Steven Zucker, Ph.D. Steven is co-founder and executive director of Smarthistory. Previously, Steven was dean of art and history at Khan Academy. He was also chair of history of art and design at Pratt Institute where he strengthened enrollment and lead the renewal of curriculum across the Institute. Before that, he was dean of the School of Graduate Studies at the Fashion Institute of Technology, SUNY and chair of their art history department. He has taught at The School of Visual Arts, Hunter College, and at The Museum of Modern Art. Dr. Zucker is a recipient of the SUNY Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Teaching. He has co-authored, with Dr. Beth Harris, numerous articles on the future of education and the future of museums, topics he regularly addresses at conferences around the world. Dr. Zucker received his Ph.D. from the Graduate Center of the City University of New York.

xiii

Map

xv

PART I

An introduction to the art of Ancient Rome

1. Introduction to ancient Roman art Dr. Jessica Leay Ambler

View of the Roman forum, looking toward the Colosseum (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

Roman art: when and where

Roman art is a very broad topic, spanning almost 1,000 years and three continents, from Europe into Africa and Asia. The first Roman art can be dated back to 509 B.C.E., with the legendary founding of the Roman Republic, and lasted until 330 C.E. (or much longer, if you include Byzantine art). Roman art also encompasses a broad spectrum of media including marble, painting, mosaic, gems, silver and bronze work, and terracottas, just to name a few. The city of Rome was a melting pot, and the Romans had no qualms about adapting artistic influences from the other Mediterranean cultures that surrounded and preceded them. For this reason it is common to see Greek, Etruscan and Egyptian influences throughout Roman art. This is not to say that all of Roman art is derivative, though, and one of the challenges for specialists is to define what is “Roman” about Roman art.

Greek art certainly had a powerful influence on Roman practice; the Roman poet Horace famously said that “Greece, the captive, took her savage victor captive,” meaning that Rome (though it conquered Greece) adapted much of Greece’s cultural and artistic heritage (as well as importing many of its most famous works). It is also true that many Romans commissioned versions of famous Greek works from earlier centuries; this is why we often have marble versions of lost Greek bronzes such as the Doryphoros by Polykleitos.

Doryphoros (Spear Bearer), Roman copy after an original by the Greek sculptor Polykleitos from c. 450-440 B.C.E., marble, 6’6″ (Archaeological Museum, Naples) (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

The Romans did not believe, as we do today, that to have a copy of an artwork was of any less value that to have the original. The copies, however, were more often variations rather than direct copies, and they had small changes made to them. The variations could be made with humor, taking the serious and somber element of Greek art and turning it on its head. So, for example, a famously gruesome Hellenistic sculpture of the satyr Marsyas being flayed was converted in a Roman dining room to a knife handle (currently in the National Archaeological Museum in Perugia). A knife was the very element that would have been used to flay the poor satyr, demonstrating not only the owner’s knowledge of Greek mythology and important statuary, but also a dark sense of humor. From the direct reporting of the Greeks to the utilitarian and humorous luxury item of a Roman enthusiast, Marsyas made quite the journey. But the Roman artist was not simply copying. He was also adapting in a conscious and brilliant way. It is precisely this ability to adapt, convert, combine elements and add a touch of humor that makes Roman art Roman.

Republican Rome

The mythic founding of the Roman Republic is supposed to have happened in 509 B.C.E., when the last Etruscan king, Tarquinius Superbus, was overthrown. During the Republican period, the Romans were governed by annually elected magistrates, the two

3

consuls being the most important among them, and the Senate, which was the ruling body of the state. Eventually the system broke down and civil wars ensued between 100 and 42 B.C.E. The wars were finally brought to an end when Octavian (later called Augustus) defeated Mark Antony in the Battle of Actium in 31 B.C.E.

In the Republican period, art was produced in the service of the state, depicting public sacrifices or celebrating victorious military campaigns (like the Monument of Aemilius Paullus at Delphi). Portraiture extolled the communal goals of the Republic; hard work, age, wisdom, being a community leader and soldier. Patrons chose to have themselves represented with balding heads, large noses, and extra wrinkles, demonstrating that they had spent their lives working for the Republic as model citizens, flaunting their acquired wisdom with each furrow of the brow. We now call this portrait style veristic, referring to the hyper-naturalistic features that emphasize every flaw, creating portraits of individuals with personality and essence.

Imperial Rome

Augustus’s rise to power in Rome signaled the end of the Roman Republic and the formation of Imperial rule. Roman art was now put to the service of aggrandizing the ruler and his family. It was also meant to indicate shifts in leadership. The major periods in Imperial Roman art are named after individual rulers or major dynasties, they are:

Augustan (27 B.C.E.-14 C.E.) Julio-Claudian (14-68 C.E.) Flavian (69-98 C.E.) Trajanic (98-117 C.E.) Hadrianic (117-138 C.E.) Antonine (138-193 C.E.) Severan (193-235 C.E.) Soldier Emperor (235-284 C.E.) Tetrarchic (284-312 C.E.) Constantinian (307-337 C.E.)

Imperial art often hearkened back to the Classical art of the past. “Classical”, or “Classicizing,” when used in reference to Roman art refers broadly to the influences of Greek art from the Classical and Hellenistic periods (480-31 B.C.E.). Classicizing elements include the smooth lines, elegant drapery, idealized nude bodies, highly naturalistic forms and balanced proportions that the Greeks had perfected over centuries of practice.

Marble bust of a man, mid 1st century, marble, 14 3/8 inches (The Metropolitan Museum of Art)

Augustus and the Julio-Claudian dynasty were particularly fond of adapting Classical elements into their art. The Augustus of Primaporta was made at the end of Augustus’s life, yet he is represented as youthful, idealized and strikingly handsome like a young athlete; all hallmarks of Classical art. The emperor Hadrian was known as a philhellene, or lover of all things Greek. The emperor himself began sporting a Greek “philosopher’s beard” in his official portraiture, unheard of before this time. Décor at his rambling Villa at Tivoli included mosaic copies of famous Greek paintings, such as Battle of the Centaursand Wild Beastsby the legendary ancient Greek painter Zeuxis.

Augustus of Primaporta, 1st century C.E. (Vatican Museums) (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

4 Smarthistory guide to Ancient Roman Art

Relief from the Ara Pacis Augustae (Altar of Augustan Peace), dedicated in 9 B.C.E., marble (Museo dell’Ara Pacis, Rome) (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

Pair of Centaurs Fighting Cats of Preyfrom Hadrian’s Villa, mosaic, c. 130 C.E. (Altes Museum, Berlin)

Later Imperial art moved away from earlier Classical influences, and Severan art signals the shift to art of Late Antiquity. The characteristics of Late Antique art include frontality, stiffness of pose and drapery, deeply drilled lines, less naturalism, squat proportions and lack of individualism. Important figures are often slightly larger or are placed above the rest of the crowd to denote importance.

Chariot procession of Septimus Severus, relief from the attach of the Arch of Septimus Severus, Leptis Magna, Libya, 203 C.E., marble, 5; 6” high (Castle Museum, Tripoli)

In relief panels from the Arch of Septimius Severus from Lepcis Magna, Septimius Severus and his sons, Caracalla and Geta ride in a chariot, marking them out from an otherwise uniform sea of repeating figures, all wearing the same stylized and flat drapery. There is little variation or individualism in the figures and they are all stiff and carved with deep, full lines. There is an ease to reading the work; Septimius is centrally located, between his sons and slightly taller; all the other figures direct the viewer’s eyes to him.

Introduction to ancient Roman art 5

Relief from the Arch of Constantine, 315 C.E., Rome (photo: F. Tronchin, CC BY- NC-ND 2.0)

Constantinian art continued to integrate the elements of Late Antiquity that had been introduced in the Severan period, but they are now developed even further. For example, on the oratio relief panel on the Arch of Constantine, the figures are even more squat, frontally oriented, similar to one another, and there is a clear lack of naturalism. Again, the message is meant to be understood without hesitation: Constantine is in power.

Who made Roman art?

We don’t know much about who made Roman art. Artists certainly existed in antiquity but we know very little about them, especially during the Roman period, because of a lack of documentary evidence such as contracts or letters. What evidence we do have, such as Pliny the Elder’s Natural History, pays little attention to contemporary artists and often focuses more on the Greek artists of the past. As a result, scholars do not refer to specific artists but consider them generally, as a largely anonymous group.

Painted Garden, removed from the triclinium (dining room) in the Villa of Livia Drusilla, Prima Porta, fresco, 30-20 B.C.E. (Museo Nazionale Romano, Palazzo Massimo, Rome) (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

What did they make?

Roman art encompasses private art made for Roman homes as well as art in the public sphere. The elite Roman home provided an opportunity for the owner to display his wealth, taste and education to his visitors, dependents, and clients. Since Roman homes were regularly visited and were meant to be viewed, their decoration was of the utmost importance. Wall paintings, mosaics, and sculptural

displays were all incorporated seamlessly with small luxury items such as bronze figurines and silver bowls. The subject matter ranged from busts of important ancestors to mythological and historical scenes, still lifes, and landscapes—all to create the idea of an erudite patron steeped in culture.

Ludovisi Battle Sarcophagus: Battle of Romans and Barbarians, c. 250-260 C.E., preconneus marble, 150 cm high (Palazzo Altemps: Museo Nazionale Romano, Rome) (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

When Romans died, they left behind imagery that identified them as individuals. Funerary imagery often emphasized unique physical traits or trade, partners or favored deities. Roman funerary art spans several media and all periods and regions. It included portrait busts, wall reliefs set into working-class group tombs (like those at Ostia), and elite decorated tombs (like the Via delle Tombe at Pompeii). In addition, there were painted Faiyum portraits placed on mummies and sarcophagi. Because death touched all levels of society—men and women, emperors, elites, and freedmen—funerary art recorded the diverse experiences of the various peoples who lived in the Roman empire.

The public sphere is filled with works commissioned by the emperors such as portraits of the imperial family or bath houses decorated with copies of important Classical statues. There are also commemorative works like the triumphal arches and columns that served a didactic as well as a celebratory function. The arches and columns (like the Arch of Titus or the Column of Trajan), marked victories, depicted war, and described military life. They also revealed foreign lands and enemies of the state. They could also depict an emperor’s successes in domestic and foreign policy rather than in war, such as Trajan’s Arch in Benevento. Religious art is also included in this category, such as the cult statues placed in Roman temples that stood in for the deities they represented, like Venus or Jupiter. Gods and religions from other parts of the empire also made their way to Rome’s capital including the Egyptian goddess Isis, the Persian god Mithras and ultimately Christianity. Each of these religions brought its own unique sets of imagery to inform proper worship and instruct their sect’s followers.

It can be difficult to pinpoint just what is Roman about Roman art, but it is the ability to adapt, to take in and to uniquely combine influences over centuries of practice that made Roman art distinct.

6 Smarthistory guide to Ancient Roman Art

Column of Trajan, looking up, Carrera marble, completed 113 C.E., Rome, dedicated to Emperor Trajan in honor of his victory over Dacia (now Romania) 101-02 and 105-06 C.E. (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

Additional resources:

Clarke, John R. Art in the Lives of Ordinary Romans: Visual Representation and Non-Elite Viewers in Italy, 100 B.C-A.D. 315. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2003.

Kleiner, Fred S. A History of Roman Art. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth, 2007.

Ramage, Nancy H., and Andrew Ramage. Roman Art: Romulus to Constantine. Fifth Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall, Inc., 2008.

Stewart, Peter. The Social History of Roman Art. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2008.

Zanker, Paul. Roman Art. Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum, 2010.

Introduction to ancient Roman art 7

2. The classical orders of architecture Dr. Jessica Leay Ambler

An architectural order describes a style of building. In classical architecture each order is readily identifiable by means of its proportions and profiles, as well as by various aesthetic details. The style of column employed serves as a useful index of the style itself, so identifying the order of the column will then, in turn, situate the order employed in the structure as a whole. The classical orders—described by the labels Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian—do not merely serve as descriptors for the remains of ancient buildings, but as an index to the architectural and aesthetic development of Greek architecture itself.

The Doric order

Doric order

The Doric order is the earliest of the three Classical orders of architecture and represents an important moment in Mediterranean architecture when monumental construction made the transition from impermanent materials (i.e. wood) to permanent materials, namely stone. The Doric order is characterized by a plain, unadorned column capital and a column that rests directly on the stylobate of the temple without a base. The Doric entablature includes a frieze composed of trigylphs (vertical plaques with three divisions) and

metopes (square spaces for either painted or sculpted decoration). The columns are fluted and are of sturdy, if not stocky, proportions.

The Doric order emerged on the Greek mainland during the course of the late seventh century B.C.E. and remained the predominant order for Greek temple construction through the early fifth century B.C.E., although notable buildings of the Classical period—especially the canonical Parthenon in Athens—still employ it. By 575 B.C.E the order may be properly identified, with some of the earliest surviving elements being the metope plaques from the Temple of Apollo at Thermon. Other early, but fragmentary, examples include the sanctuary of Hera at Argos, votive capitals from the island of Aegina, as well as early Doric capitals that were a part of the Temple of Athena Pronaia at Delphi in central Greece. The Doric order finds perhaps its fullest expression in the Parthenon (c. 447-432 B.C.E.) at Athens designed by Iktinos and Kallikrates.

Iktinos and Kallikrates, The Parthenon, 447 – 432 B.C.E., Athens (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

The Ionic order

As its names suggests, the Ionic Order originated in Ionia, a coastal region of central Anatolia (today Turkey) where a number of ancient Greek settlements were located. Volutes (scroll-like ornaments) characterize the Ionic capital and a base supports the column, unlike the Doric order. The Ionic order developed in Ionia during the mid-sixth century B.C.E. and had been transmitted to

9

mainland Greece by the fifth century B.C.E. Among the earliest examples of the Ionic capital is the inscribed votive column from Naxos, dating to the end of the seventh century B.C.E.

Ionic capital, north porch of the Erechtheion, 421-407 B.C.E., marble, Acropolis, Athens (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

The monumental temple dedicated to Hera on the island of Samos, built by the architect Rhoikos c. 570-560 B.C.E., was the first of the great Ionic buildings, although it was destroyed by earthquake in short order. The sixth century B.C.E. Temple of Artemis at Ephesus, a wonder of the ancient world, was also an Ionic design. In Athens the Ionic order influences some elements of the Parthenon (447-432 B.C.E.), notably the Ionic frieze that encircles the cella of the temple. Ionic columns are also employed in the interior of the monumental gateway to the Acropolis known as the Propylaia (c. 437-432 B.C.E.). The Ionic was promoted to an exterior order in the construction of the Erechtheion (c. 421-405 B.C.E.) on the Athenian Acropolis (image below).

North porch of the Erechtheion, 421-407 B.C.E., marble, Acropolis, Athens (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

The Ionic order is notable for its graceful proportions, giving a more slender and elegant profile than the Doric order. The ancient Roman architect Vitruvius compared the Doric module to a sturdy, male body, while the Ionic was possessed of more graceful, feminine proportions. The Ionic order incorporates a running frieze of continuous sculptural relief, as opposed to the Doric frieze composed of triglyphs and metopes.

The Corinthian order

The Corinthian order is both the latest and the most elaborate of the Classical orders of architecture. The order was employed in both Greek and Roman architecture, with minor variations, and gave rise, in turn, to the Composite order. As the name suggests, the origins of the order were connected in antiquity with the Greek city-state of Corinth where, according to the architectural writer Vitruvius, the sculptor Callimachus drew a set of acanthus leaves surrounding a votive basket (Vitr. 4.1.9-10). In archaeological terms the earliest known Corinthian capital comes from the Temple of Apollo Epicurius at Bassae and dates to c. 427 B.C.E.

Corinthian Capital, Odeon of Agrippa, Athenian Agora (photo: Tilemahos Efthimiadis CC BY-SA 2.0)

The defining element of the Corinthian order is its elaborate, carved capital, which incorporates even more vegetal elements than the Ionic order does. The stylized, carved leaves of an acanthus plant grow around the capital, generally terminating just below the abacus. The Romans favored the Corinthian order, perhaps due to its slender properties. The order is employed in numerous notable Roman architectural monuments, including the Temple of Mars Ultor and the Pantheon in Rome, and the Maison Carrée in Nîmes.

Acanthus leaf (photo: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

10 Smarthistory guide to Ancient Roman Art

https://flic.kr/p/73uvoX
Legacy of the Greek architectural canon

The canonical Greek architectural orders have exerted influence on architects and their imaginations for thousands of years. While Greek architecture played a key role in inspiring the Romans, its legacy also stretches far beyond antiquity. When James “Athenian” Stuart and Nicholas Revett visited Greece during the period from 1748 to 1755 and subsequently published The Antiquities of Athens and Other Monuments of Greece (1762) in London, the Neoclassical revolution

was underway. Captivated by Stuart and Revett’s measured drawings and engravings, Europe suddenly demanded Greek forms. Architects the likes of Robert Adam drove the Neoclassical movement, creating buildings like Kedleston Hall, an English country house in Kedleston, Derbyshire. Neoclassicism even jumped the Atlantic Ocean to North America, spreading the rich heritage of Classical architecture even further—and making the Greek architectural orders not only extremely influential, but eternal.

The Greek orders (photos: Steven Zucker, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0)

Additional resources:

B. A. Barletta, The Origins of the Greek Architectural Orders (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001).

H. Berve, G. Gruben and M. Hirmer, Greek temples, theatres, and shrines (New York: H. N. Abrams, 1963).

F. A. Cooper, The Temple of Apollo Bassitas 4 vol. (Princeton N.J.: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1992-1996).

J. J. Coulton, Ancient Greek Architects at Work: Problems of Structure and Design (Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press, 1982).

W. B. Dinsmoor, The Architecture of Greece: an Account of its Historic Development 3rd ed. (London: Batsford, 1950).

W. B. Dinsmoor, The Propylaia to the Athenian Akropolis, 1: The predecessors (Princeton NJ: American School of Classical Studies at Athens, 1980).

P. Gros, Vitruve et la tradition des traités d’architecture: fabrica et ratiocinatio: recueil d’études (Rome: École française de Rome, 2006).

G. Gruben, “Naxos und Delos. Studien zur archaischen Architektur der Kykladen.” Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archäologischen Instituts112 (1997): 261–416.

Marie-Christine Hellmann, L’architecture Grecque 3 vol. (Paris: Picard, 2002-2010).

The classical orders of architecture 11

A. Hoffmann, E.-L. Schwander, W. Hoepfner, and G. Brands (eds), Bautechnik der Antike: internationales Kolloquium in Berlin vom 15.-17. Februar 1990 (Diskussionen zur archäologischen Bauforschung; 5), (Mainz am Rhein: P. von Zabern, 1991).

M. Korres, From Pentelicon to the Parthenon: The Ancient Quarries and the Story of a Half-Worked Column Capital of the First Marble Parthenon (Athens: Melissa Publishing House, 1995).

M. Korres, Stones of the Parthenon (Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum, 2000).

A. W. Lawrence, Greek Architecture 5th ed. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996).

D. S. Robertson, Greek and Roman Architecture 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1969).

J. Rykwert, The Dancing Column: On Order in Architecture (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1996).

E.-L. Schwandner and G. Gruben, Säule und Gebälk: zu Struktur und Wandlungsprozess griechisch-römischer Architektur: Bauforschungs- kolloquium in Berlin vom 16. bis 18. Juni 1994 (Mainz am Rhein: Verlag Philipp von Zabern, 1996).

M. Wilson Jones, “Designing the Roman Corinthian Order,” Journal of Roman Archaeology, vol. 2, 1989, pp. 35-69.

12 Smarthistory guide to Ancient Roman Art

3. Damnatio memoriaeDamnatio memoriae—Roman sanctions against

memory Dr. Francesca Tronchin

Detail of Geta (face removed) and Caracalla from the Severan Tondo, c. 200 C.E., tempera on wood, 30.5 cm diameter (Altes Museum, Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, photo:

Carole Raddato, CC BY-SA 2.0)

We know that Roman emperors were often raised to the status of gods after their deaths. (Take, for example, the Augustus of Primaporta, a statue whose symbolism suggests Augustus was descended from the gods). However, just as many emperors were given the opposite treatment—officially erased from memory.

Condemning memory

Damnatio memoriae is a term we use to describe a Roman phenomenon in which the government condemned the memory of a

person who was seen as a tyrant, traitor, or other sort of enemy to the state. (This Latin term, which literally means “condemnation of memory,” was not used by the Romans themselves; it was first used in the seventeenth century.) The images of such condemned figures would be destroyed, their names erased from inscriptions, and if the doomed person were an emperor or other government official, even his laws could be rescinded. Coins bearing the image of an emperor who had his memory damned would be recalled or cancelled. In some cases, the residence of the condemned could be razed or otherwise destroyed. [1]

13

https://smarthistory.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Berlin-tondo-detail.jpg
https://smarthistory.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Berlin-tondo-detail.jpg
https://flic.kr/p/mCPtzc
This was more than a form of casual, politically-motivated vandalism, carried out by disgruntled individuals, since the condemnation required approval of the Senate and the effects of the official denunciation could be seen far from Rome. There are many examples of damnatio memoriae throughout the history of the Roman Republic and Empire. As many as 26 emperors through the reign of Constantine had their memories condemned; conversely, about 25 emperors were deified (raised to the status of gods) after their deaths. The damning of memory phenomenon, however, is not unique to the Roman world. Egyptian pharaohs Hatshepsut and Akhenaten likewise had many of their their images, monuments, and inscriptions destroyed by political opponents or religious purists. [2]

Did it work?

Portrait of Emperor Caligula, 37-41 C.E., marble, 28 cm high (Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, Copenhagen, photo: Dr. Francesca Tronchin, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Damnatio memoriae were not completely successful in wiping out the memory of an individual. Among the emperors who suffered damnatio memoriaeare some of the best-known figures from Roman history, including Gaius (a.k.a. Caligula) and Nero. The notoriety of these men comes to us not only from texts written during their lifetimes and later, but also from images which survived the immediate violence of the damnatio memoriaeand then centuries of neglect.

For instance, one marble portrait preserves not only the image of Caligula, but also traces of paint, informing us of the existence of this condemned emperor as well as the polychromy (the use of multiple colors of paint) of ancient sculpture. In antiquity, these types of images were considered very powerful and closely linked with the identity of the person they represented.

Two portrait heads of Emperor Caligula, created 37-41 C.E., marble, both detached from the sculpted bodies after his death. Left: 43 x 21.5 x 25 cm (The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles) ; right: 33 x 21 x 23.5 cm (Yale University Art Gallery)

Portrait statue of Caligula, recarved as Claudius, from the Basilica at Velleia, first half of the 1st century C.E., marble, 221 cm high (Museo Archeologico Nazionale, Parma, photo: Sailko, CC BY-SA 4.0)

Small heads, big reputations

Caligula was the first emperor to have his images purposefully destroyed after his death. It is impossible to know how many portraits

14 Smarthistory guide to Ancient Roman Art

https://flic.kr/p/cCW5gb
https://www.getty.edu/art/collection/objects/7005/unknown-maker-portrait-head-of-caligula-roman-ad-37-41/
https://www.getty.edu/art/collection/objects/7005/unknown-maker-portrait-head-of-caligula-roman-ad-37-41/
https://artgallery.yale.edu/collections/objects/7260
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Statue_della_famiglia_giulio_claudia,_dal_foro_di_veleia,_14-54_dc_ca.,_caligola.jpg
in bronze or other precious metals were melted down, but a number of marble portraits show traces of being re-cut or simply dismantled and disposed of. Workshop procedures for official imperial portraits dictated that many full-length statues in stone were to be created in two pieces. So heads of Caligula, like those now in the Getty Villa and the Yale University Art Gallery (above), could be fairly easily detached from the bodies and tossed aside and a portrait head of the new emperor would swiftly replace the offending one.