Analyzing Ancient Greek and Roman architecture - AP Art History

The defeated Dacians are depicted on the base of the column. They are shown as being worthy opponents to further highlight how significant the victory was for Trajan -- they appear strong, which shows how strong Trajan's army needed to be to defeat them. Above the defeated Dacians is a victory laurel to again highlight the significance of winning the battle against them.

Image accessed through Wikipedia Media Commons: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/RomaColonnaTraiana%26BasilicaUlpia.jpg

Originally, two libraries stood next to the column. Each had manuscripts detailing the Roman-Dacian war. One had the manuscripts in Roman, and the other in Greek. (Lamassu guardians are associated with Assyrian architecture and art, and steles, such as the Stele of Hammurabi, are associated with the Babylonians.)

Image accessed through Wikipedia Media Commons: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/RomaColonnaTraiana%26BasilicaUlpia.jpg

The Parthenon is a beautiful example of a rather severe style: the Doric order. The Doric order was one of the earliest Greek orders, but continued to be used on the Greek mainland even after other orders had been created. It was much less common in cultures that imitated Greek art, such as the Romans and Renaissance Europe.

Ionic and Corinthian architecture was marked by taller, slenderer columns. Even the Doric temples, still built on the Greek mainland were less squat that their predecessors. The Greeks felt that this gave the buildings a lighter and more delicate feel.

The cella was the room that housed the statue of the patron deity. It was a place reserved almost exclusively to the priests. Many temples did have an antechamber to the cella where people could leave votive offerings.

The formula used to determine the relative length and width of most temples was front columns: side columns = n:n2+1. This meant that the temple would be roughly twice as long as it was wide. The Greeks used mathematical equations as the basis for many of the proportions of their buildings, feeling that this added to their beauty.

Early Greek temples were similar to those of nearby cultures. That is to say they were simple 4 walled structures that housed the statue of a deity. As time progressed the Greeks innovated on this basic design by adding rows of columns on all sides, that screened, but did not entirely hide the inner structure.

Triglyphs and metopes are a characteristic of the doric order temple, but were abandoned by the time the ionic order became the favored architectural tradition in favor of an uninterrupted frieze that could house relief sculpture.

The Doric order was heavy and squat. It was followed in the fourth century by the Ionic, which boasted more slender columns and longer proportions. It was considered more aesthetically pleasant than the Doric order, so Classical Greeks desired it more than the Doric order at the height of the artistic tradition from this period.

You can see that the building is Ionic by noting the bases on the columns (the larger circles around the outside of the circles that denote columns). Most other buildings on the acropolis were made of limestone, but the small size of this temple allowed architects to use pentelic marble.

There is evidence that the white piece found in Greece were actually brightly colored, giving us an image of Greece that is much different than the white marble we think of when we think of Classical Greece.

Temples epitomized the Greek way of life. They formed a balanced and aesthetically pleasing background to the daily lives of the Greeks, not necessarily places of active worship for the masses. They were built to be seen from outside, where their harmony spoke of the rationality of life.

There is a long-standing myth that the Romans invented the arch. This is simply not true, arches can in fact be found among ancient Greek ruins. They were mostly used underground. While the Romans didn’t invent the arch, they were the first to put it to wide use.

While many early civilizations sought to show the importance of a building by its size, the Greeks aimed, not so much for immense structures, but properly proportioned ones. We are still using their standards of proportion on art and architecture today. This doesn’t mean that there were no large Greek temples, but this was not a common characteristic.

The Greeks discovered that the human eye will interpret certain straight lines as curved and vice versa. When someone looks at a long row of columns they will appear to be crooked. To compensate for this they made the columns bulge outward and the steps curve slightly.

Some Greek temples are in fact massive, but for the Greeks religion and art were centered on man. The people who used the temples were in some ways the focal point, not the afterlife, or strange and exotic deities. Because of this the temples were supposed to be more in proportion to the people who used them.

The Romans copied many stylistic elements from Greek temples. There was, however, a major difference. Greek temples were built freestanding and without regard for the other buildings around them. Roman temples, on the other hand, were built in conjunction with large municipal building projects and their final design took this into account.

Even centuries after temples were built from stone, they were still strongly influenced by their wooden predecessors. Characteristics that the original temples had, for structural reasons were copied in the stone forms. For instance, the round columns imitated tree trunks, and the square triglyphs above the columns were meant to look like horizontal beams sticking out of the face of the building.

Ionic and Corinthian architecture was marked by taller, slenderer columns. Even the Doric temples, still built on the Greek mainland were less squat that their predecessors. The Greeks felt that this gave the buildings a lighter and more delicate feel.