Bernini's Sculptures in the Villa Borghese

Nicole Day-Bazhaw
Honors in Rome - Summer 2005

I. Introduction

At the beginning of the seventeenth century, as Rome began to make its artistic transition from the late Renaissance to early Baroque, the sculptor Gian Lorenzo Bernini was just starting to make his mark in the art world. The talents of this budding prodigy did not go unnoticed by Scipione Caffarelli Borghese, and it was his patronage that set Bernini’s career on a firm foundation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gian_Lorenzo_Bernini
Bernini Self Portrait

Scipione Borghese was a man who attained great wealth and power due to his greed and the good fortune of having a powerful uncle. His education itself was financed by that uncle, Camillo Borghese. The relationship between Scipione and Camillo proved to be invaluable. In 1605, Camillo Borghese was elected to the papal throne as Paul V. Using his position he was able to ordain his nephew as a priest within the year. Ten days later, he appointed Scipione cardinal. At this time the official post of Cardinal Nephew had not yet been abolished, and with it came the responsibilities of managing the internal and external affairs of the Papal States. The Cardinal benefited further from the papal nepotism when his uncle placed the management of both the papal and Borghese family finances into his care. Scipione Borghese exploited his authority as Cardinal Nephew and amassed great fortunes for the Borghese family.

http://www.saint-mike.org/Library/ Papal_Library/PaulV/PaulV.html
Bust of Pope Paul V
Bust completed by Bernini in 1618.

In contrast to his uncle, Scipione Borghese was an ambitious connoisseur of art. Pope Paul V was not interested in the experimental techniques and novel designs of the art world; rather he focused on urban embellishment and works of engineering or private commissions for himself and his family. He did, however, indirectly support Rome’s rising Baroque sculptor, Bernini, through his supportive connection with his nephew.

Bernini was born in 1598 in Naples and moved with his family to Rome in 1605. His talents were fostered at a young age by his father, Pietro Bernini, who was also a gifted sculptor. Pietro Bernini taught his young son the fundamentals of sculpture and introduced him to artists such as Annibale Carracci who helped further his education. Additionally his work in Santa Maria Maggiore for Pope Paul V provided the connection to the Borghese family that revealed his son’s talents to Scipione Borghese. When he was approximately sixteen years of age, Bernini completed his first commission for the Borghese family, the Goat Almalthea. Following soon after, he sculpted a bust of the pope which seemed to secure Scipione Borghese’s opinion of him and resulted in six years of patronage from the Cardinal. Bernini completed several more sculptures of much greater magnitude than the first two commissioned for the family, for display in Scipione Borghese’s grand villa. The villa itself, designed by architects Flaminio Ponzio and Giovanni Vasanzio, was built mainly to house and display the Cardinal’s extensive art collection. This was a very appropriate setting for the early works of one of Rome’s greatest sculptors of the seventeenth century.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image: Galleria_Borghese_by_Mike_Reed.jpg
Villa Borghese

II. Description

Aeneas, Anchises and Ascanius Fleeing Troy (c. 1618-1619)
The first of Bernini’s life size sculptures commissioned for Scipione depicts the man Aeneas, the legendary founder of Rome, fleeing Troy while carrying his father on his shoulders with his young son, Ascanius, following close behind. The robust man balances his aging father on his left shoulder, stabilizing him with both hands while his gaze is fixed on the ground ahead, as if carefully watching his steps. The old man steadies himself on his son with one hand while the other hand grasps a family relic above his son’s head. Ascanius is close to his father’s legs with a look of fear in his eyes. Bernini’s father was a Mannerist sculptor, and this influence can be seen in his son’s sculpture. The three generations are arranged in a precarious vertical composition. The group of three figures is centered on a small pedestal, from which Aeneas almost seems to be slipping, which enhances the spiraling movement of the bodies. Both of these characteristics follow in Mannerist tradition. The sculpture is not entirely Mannerist, however; Bernini conveys much more movement in the figures. The action of muscles and tendons can be seen against the skin, and the veins bulge. The skin of the old man is distinctively different from that of his son, as can be seen in the sagging skin and more pronounced veins. These features were not found in Mannerism; rather they were products of Bernini’s own genius and his ability to mold marble as if it were clay. As Howard Hibbard states: “[Bernini] was out of sympathy with the aesthetic aims of Mannerism but was as yet unable to abandon its principles.” The composition was decidedly Mannerism, but the features of the figures themselves were not. This was a transitional piece for Bernini, in which he shed his last attachment with Mannerism from his early training and began creating works in his new realistic style.

http://www.wga.hu/art/b/bernini/gianlore/ sculptur/1610/aeneas.jpg
Aeneas, Anchises and Ascanius Fleeing Troy
Bernini (c. 1618-1619)

Pluto and Persephone (c. 1621-1622)
The next sculpture in the series commissioned for Scipione begins the three great Bernini works of the Villa in which Bernini achieved his new style. The work shows the maiden Persephone being abducted by the god of the underworld, Pluto, and being taken to Hades, past the three headed dog Cerberus who guards its borders. Pluto’s fingers press into her flesh as he holds her to his chest while she pushes at his head in her struggle to escape. The turbulent emotion in this scene pours from the marble. Rudolf Wittkower states: “Bernini interpreted this old rape-theme as a conflict between brutal lust and desperate anguish, emphasizing the contrasting feelings of the two figures by various compositional subtleties…” Persephone’s body twists away from her captor and her face is frozen mid cry with tears running down her cheek. Bernini’s intricate details show movement and struggle with her hair in tendrils flying back from her shoulders. Pluto’s face is slightly distorted as Persephone’s hand pushes at its side. His expression reflects bemusement at her futile struggle, as he is obviously triumphant in his goal- indicated by the presence of ferocious Cerberus as his feet. The three heads of the beast snarl, bearing their precisely carved teeth, with such detail from the swirls of fur on their body to their claws that it looks as if it might come alive. Bernini was a master at being able to convey emotions through marble. Each nuance of the piece contributes to the feelings it portrays: from Persephone’s tears to the way Pluto’s fingers sink into his captive’s flesh. This work was the first of a monumental trio.

http://www.wga.hu/art/b/bernini/gianlore/ sculptur/1620/proserpi.jpg
Pluto and Persephone
Bernini (c. 1621-1622)

Apollo and Daphne (c. 1622-1625)
Bernini based the subject of his next work on the Ovidian tale of the god Apollo and nymph Daphne. Daphne is being pursued in a chase by a love sick Apollo, and just as she is running out of strength she cries out to her father, the river god, to change her form which has caused this problem. The nymph is then transformed into a laurel tree, saving her from her pursuer. Bernini depicts the scene in which Apollo has just caught up to Daphne and reaches his arm around her waist. At the instant that she feels his touch, her body starts transforming into a tree. Apollo observes this transfiguration, and in his expression, one can see his momentary elation being broken by the shock of seeing the subject of his love turning into a tree. His elation itself is false, as his hand only grasps the bark covering her torso. Her fingers sprout intricate leaves as her arms are thrown up in her last effort to escape. Even her body begins to be encased in bark as her toes sprout roots into the ground. The expression carved by Bernini on her face shows her fear of the pursuer who has finally caught up to her. At the same time she seems unaware of her transformation that has Apollo so astounded. Bernini masterfully captures this moment in time. Daphne’s hair is whipped around, even as it begins to sprout leaves, showing her sudden halt from flight at her metamorphosis and capture by Apollo. Even the drapery around the figures is flung around them and trailing out in the space behind them, showing the speed of the chase. Apollo’s right hand steadies him as he runs and reaches out to capture his love. Bernini takes a scene traditionally depicted through literature and painting, and successfully captures the psyches of the characters, as well as the elaborate physical details of each, all to convey this snapshot in mythology.

http://www.angelo.edu/faculty/rprestia/ 1301/images/IN412Bern.jpg
Apollo and Daphne
Bernini (c. 1622-1625)

David (c. 1623-1624)
Though technically this sculpture was completed before the Apollo and Daphne was finished, it was the last to be commissioned in the trio of Bernini’s monumental Borghese works. It is also typically regarded as the final work because it is considered to be the most psychologically advanced of the three statues. This sculpture depicts the biblical character, David, summoning his strength while aiming his slingshot at the giant, Goliath. David’s adversary, however, is not sculpted in this piece, but his stance and intense gaze suggest its presence, prompting the viewer to imagine the towering Goliath. Bernini modeled the facial expression of the David after watching his own expressions in a mirror. Sheer concentration is expertly demonstrated through the tense facial muscles, clenched mouth, flaring nostrils and knitted brow. The figure’s stance is wide, with his toes gripping the ground as he prepares for his shot. A shield and harp at his feet, David’s entire body is twisted to his right, counterbalanced by the turn of his head and position of his arms to face his adversary. Bernini masterfully conveys a scene of great tension and psychological implications through the David, successfully securing proof of his talent at a young age.

http://www.wga.hu/art/b/bernini/gianlore/ sculptur/1620/david.jpg
David
Bernini (c. 1623-1624)

III. Function

The Villa Borghese was built primarily to showcase the extensive collection of art that Scipione Borghese had acquired. The villa itself had little living space. It served to entertain and impress guests by means of the magnificent pieces of art it housed. The Cardinal, as a powerful politician, certainly must have used his villa to impress or gain influence among his peers and colleagues. Indeed, Pluto and Persephone did not even remain in the villa for long because Scipione Borghese gave it to the nephew of the new pope, Pope Gregory XV, to regain favor after the death of his own uncle. This, however, was only a facet of the impact of the villa and the art it contained.

Joy Kenseth (p.196)

Ground Floor of the Villa Borghese
(A) Original location of David; (B) Original location of Apollo and Daphne and proposed intended location of Pluto and Persephone

Bernini was an ambitious man, and he realized the potential of his great talents. According to Bruce Boucher, Bernini’s works in the Villa Borghese “pitted him against Michelangelo and Giambologna, the greatest sculptors of the previous century.” Bernini’s ambition drove him to compete with the talents of the masters, and he could not have picked a better place to showcase his beginning works than the Cardinal’s villa. Not only did Scipione Borghese entertain his own private guests at the villa, but also it became a popular place for foreign visitors and Roman citizens to marvel at and discuss the wonders of Bernini’s new works and the rest of the collection. As Genevieve Warwick states, “Both [artist and patron] understood that the role of the villa was to attract an educated international audience.” This role helped spread word both of Bernini’s talents and of Scipione’s wealth and fine taste.

The villa itself is compact, consisting of twenty rooms across two floors, making it possible to view the entire collection in two hours. Originally, the first floor housed primarily sculptures, while the second was devoted to paintings. Bernini’s main trio of works thus resided on the first floor. Today they are located in the center of three separate rooms, which provides quite a different effect than was intended by the artist. With the present positioning, the viewing of the sculpture is not under any control, and it is possible to view it in the round in any manner desired. Early guides written for visitors of the villa certify that originally, each of the works was placed up against a wall. Many artists argue that this placement supports the idea that Bernini intended there to be one dominant view of each sculpture. However, due to the fact that there has not been a unanimous decision on a particular dominant view for each sculpture among art historians, it seems that Bernini may have had something else in mind.

Pluto and Persephone was, as mentioned previously, given away as a gift. To fill its place in the villa, Apollo and Daphne was commissioned as its replacement. Thus the original position of the latter can be assumed as the original place for the former as well. As seen in the diagram of the ground floor of the Villa Borghese, there are two entrances to the room in which Apollo and Daphne was located. Both of which place the viewer entering in such a way that they would be facing Apollo’s back. This was obviously not the intended dominant view of the statue, yet it was enough to intrigue the viewer to follow around the figure and see the rest of the sculpture. With the statue placed against the wall, this left a 180-degree viewing range of the work. Beginning at the entrance of the room, the viewer first sees the figure of Apollo running. Following along and approaching the front of the sculpture, the viewer now sees the object of Apollo’s pursuit, Daphne. The viewer’s eyes can then follow up Daphne’s figure to the frozen cry on her face and see her fingers transforming into leaves. Once the viewer has reached the last portion of the statue, the metamorphosis of the nymph is fully visible and one can see Daphne’s form becoming encased in bark and her toes sprouting roots. In this way, Bernini creates a narrative view of the Ovidian tale he has sculpted. Had Pluto and Persephone been in this position as originally intended, a similar narrative tale would have unfolded to the viewer. First one would see the strong form of Pluto, then the maiden he has in his clutches, and finally her tears and Cerberus at their feet welcoming them to Hades.

Bernini again uses the 180-degree narrative viewing strategy with David. In this instance, the original positioning of the statue in the Villa Borghese, as the diagram shows, places David against a wall in a room in which there are two entrances. Each entrance places the viewer to see the right side of the statue first. As in Apollo and Daphne, this is not the intended dominate view, but a view that is engaging and invokes curiosity to continue to move along the statue. The right side of David does not show any specific action, but once the viewer progresses around to the front, the figure is clearly seen sighting the imaginary Goliath. Continuing further to the final side of the statue, David’s sling is seen with the rock aimed at his adversary and a facial expression of extreme concentration. The narrative Bernini projects with David is more of a psychological story, one that shows the development of the character’s mental process in regards to his impending action. This is in contrast to the narrative of Apollo and Daphne, which is derived from a poem by Ovid and is more literally a story.


VI. Patron

The broad goals Scipione Borghese intended to achieve through Bernini’s work in his villa have been previously discussed. The subject matter of each statue, however, had its own agenda that supported the patron. The magnificence of each work housed in the Cardinal’s impressive villa was not all that helped support the positive image that he hoped to project; each of Bernini’s sculptures, in fact, served Scipione Borghese in their own unique way.

http://www.artchive.com/artchive/b/bernini/borghese.jpg
Portrait Bust of Scipione Borghese
Bernini (c. 1932)

The first major work, Aeneas, Anchises and Ascanius Fleeing Troy, done by Bernini is a scene from the legendary founding of Rome. This in itself seems to show the love the Cardinal had for his city, but there was another personal side to it. According to Boucher, the image of the man, Aeneas, carrying his aging father was “representing, by use of allegory, Cardinal Borghese’s piety and support for his uncle in the affairs of state.” In Rome during this time period, the pope was an extremely powerful figure, and it was very beneficial for any citizen to show the strength of their allegiance. Even as Pope Paul V’s nephew, Scipione Borghese was not exempt from the need to use this strategy.

Since Apollo and Daphne was commissioned in place of Pluto and Persephone, both sculptures share similar purposes. After Pope Paul V died, the pope who succeeded his uncle was not in great favor with Scipione Borghese, and it seems this feeling was mutual. The Cardinal, however, was a political man, and his power had previously come from the pope. With the loss of his title as Cardinal Nephew, he lost his important role in the papal court. To regain Pope Gregory XV’s good graces, he gave his nephew the recently completed Pluto and Persephone as a sort of peace offering. The replacement commissioned was similar: both consisted of a male in pursuit of a female. This time, however, instead of a triumphant god with his catch, Apollo lost his prize as she was transformed into a tree. The similarity can be noted between Scipione Borghese’s loss of power as Cardinal Nephew and the transformation of his role in the papal court.

The final statue, David, contains a bit more subtle connection to Scipione Borghese. The Borghese family symbol is an eagle and a dragon, both to be found in various forms throughout the villa. At David’s feet, the harp that he was to play after his victory is decorated with an eagle’s head, a direct reference to the Borghese family. This connects the Borghese family to a symbol of victory, a connection by which Scipione Borghese would have been flattered. Additionally, the biblical story of David and Goliath tells the tale of a small force defeating a larger one. It is a story that the Borghese family would be proud to portray as the church triumphing over pagans.


V. Conclusion

Bernini’s works for Scipione Borghese began the Baroque style of sculpture. As Boucher states: “…a sculptural equivalent [of the Baroque movement] only emerged with Bernini’s early works during the second decade of the new century.” It wasn’t only Bernini’s talents that began this movement, for merely creating the works was not sufficient. Rather, his work had to be readily available and well known, and the Villa Borghese provided the opportunity for both. According to Caterina Volpi, “…[the Villa Borghese was] a showcase for the marvels in his [Scipione Borghese] collection that the more innovative aspects of Roman artistic culture on the threshold of the baroque era were able to find expression, thanks to the patronage of its owner…” Establishing the foundation for this artistic movement opened the door for many artists to follow and expand upon.

Today there are many visitors still attend the Villa Borghese to view the magnificent art within. Bernini’s talents make the figures in the statues come alive, and the viewer feels as if they are a part of the scene themselves; whether they feel as if they are actually hearing Persephone cry, experiencing Daphne’s horror or looking over their shoulder for the imaginary Goliath for which David aims his sling. One doesn’t need to be entirely familiar with the stories behind the statues, for it is their realism and artistic mastery that truly connects them with generations of humanity.


VI. Personal Observations

Throughout my research, the element I found most intriguing was the sheer talent that Bernini possessed. This fact didn’t really hit home for me until I was standing in the Villa Borghese and seeing his sculptures through my own eyes, not those of a professional photographer. I had read all about Bernini being a prodigy, and heard of his great talents from others, but nothing quite prepared me for actually seeing his works of art. Researching in books and seeing pictures on the internet convinced me of his capabilities, but truly understanding his skill was only possible when seeing his sculptures in reality. To stand in the presence of such great works, knowing the background behind them- just how quickly they were finished and at such a young age- was overwhelming. It is almost incomprehensible to fathom how Bernini was able to take a piece of marble and turn it into the work that I’m staring at in awe; to be able to make the figures seem as if they were once living and breathing until he transformed them into marble in an instant. For me, it wasn’t facts or figures that I will bring away with me from this project, but the experience of being in the presence of the work of a true prodigy.



VII. Bibliography

Baldinucci, Filippo. The Life of Bernini. Trans. Catherine Enggass. London: Pennsylvania UP, 1966.

Bolland, Andrea. “Desiderio and Diletto: Vision, Touch, and the Poetics of Bernini's Apollo and Daphne.” The Art Bulletin. 82.2 (June 2000): 309-330.

Boucher, Bruce. Italian Baroque Sculpture. New York: Thames, 1998.

Conconi, Maria, et al. Art and Archaeology of Rome: From Ancient Times to the Baroque. Ed. Andrea Augenti. New York: Scala, 2000.

Hibbard, Howard. Bernini. Baltimore: Penguin, 1965.

Kenseth, Joy. “Bernini’s Borghese Sculptures: Another View.” The Art Bulletin. 63.2 (June 1981): 191-210.

Warwick, Genevieve. “Speaking Statues: Bernini’s Apollo and Daphne at the Villa Borghese.” Art History. 27.3 (June 2004): 353-381.

Wittkower, Rudolf. Art and Architecture in Italy: 1600 to 1750. Baltimore: Penguin, 1972.

Wittkower, Rudolf. Bernini: The Sculptor of the Roman Baroque. New York: Phaidon, 1997.

San Luigi dei Francesi

Judy Wang
Honors in Rome - Summer 2005
small presentation


I. Historical Background of the Site or Topic

http://roma.katolsk.no/luigifrancesi.htm
San Luigi dei Francesi
Outside facade

San Luigi dei Francesi, also known as the Church of St. Louis of the French, was founded in 1518 but was not completed until 1589, due to intermittent lapses in building. Commissioned by Cardinal Guilio de Medici, the French national church was named after Louis IX, the French king who was later made a saint. The façade, designed by Giacomo della Porta, is composed of two superimposed orders of equal height. On the bottom right stands the statue of St. Louis and on both sides of the main door hang the shields linking symbols of France and Rome.

Following the general structure of a church, San Luigi dei Francesi is symmetrical, composed of a central nave and aisles on each side containing five chapels each. In front of the first chapel on the right sits a monument to the French who fell in the siege of Rome in 1849. The second chapel on the right holds Domenichino’s paintings depicting scenes of Saint Cecelia’s life, including her refusal to be sacrificed to idols, her martyrdom, her coronation by angels, and her acceptance into Paradise. At the end of the central nave is Franceso Bassano’s “Assumption of the Virgin.”

Most important to this church, aside from the tombs of many French personages, is the Contarelli Chapel, home of three of Caravaggio’s most famous Renaissance paintings. These paintings, depicting the life of Saint Matthew, include “The Vocation of St. Matthew,” “St. Matthew and the Angel,” and “The Martyrdom of St. Matthew.”


II. Bibliography
1) “San Luigi dei Francesi.” http://roma.katolsk.no/luigifrancesi.htm

2) “San Luigi dei Francesi.” http://www.goporta.com/rome/StFrancesi.htm

3) Wild, Fiona. Ed. Eyewitness Guide to Rome. New York, New York: DK Publishing Inc., 2004.

Roman atrium house - form and function

Judy Wang
Honors in Rome - Summer 2005

I. Introduction
Settled before 800 BC, Pompeii underwent several colonizations, including both Greek and Etruscan reign, before being conquered by the Romans in 310 BC. Influenced by both groups, the two-part Roman atrium house was formed by incorporating Greek garden (peristylum) elements with the Etruscan atrium, creating a dwelling of great size and functionality.

http://pompeii.virginia.edu/aerialforum.jpg
Aerial Pompeii
Only 1/3 of Pompeii has been uncovered so far.

As housing in Rome became more and more crowded, the wealthy elite began to migrate to Pompeii, causing Pompeii to become a city whose denizens consisted the extremely wealthy and powerful and their slaves. The homes were occupied by a single household, comprised of several generations, slaves, intimate friends, and occasionally, clients close to the family. The paterfamilias, legally recognized as the ultimate authority of the Roman famalia, not only secured the resources of the family, but also determined the future of each member. As the patron of the house, he would hire various architects and slaves in order to build these homes.

After the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in 79 AD, the city of Pompeii was buried in its precise historical, social, and cultural context, allowing us a glimpse of Roman domestic life. After being subject to roughly two millennia of looting, Pompeii’s location was finally discovered in the 18th century. Excavations began in 1748; over 200 atrium-style houses have been discovered to this day..

II. Description
Although each house differed in its individual structure, certain elements remained consistent in its layout. Derived from the Etruscans, the front of the house centered around the atrium; the latter half, true to Greek form, centered around the peristylum.

Often decorated with imported expensive rugs or costly marble walls, the fauces led from the front door, which remained open during the daytime, into the rectangular atrium, the main room of the house. In more wealthy homes, either a dog or a doorman would greet visitors as they entered. In the center of the atrium was the impluvium, a rectangular pool that collected rainwater through a rectangular opening above, the compluvium. From the impluvium, rainwater traveled through pipes leading to cisterns, underground water storage tanks. Small rooms serving multiple purposes called cubiculae surrounded the atrium. These rooms were mostly bedrooms and were often connected to procoetons, where personal servants slept. Alae, open rooms that flanked both sides of the atrium, served little to no purpose at all. Before the inclusion of the compluvium into the atrium, the windows of the alae were commonly used as a source of light. Afterwards, however, its use became obsolete, seemingly included in the housing arrangement merely due to tradition.

http://www.roman-empire.net/society/soc-house.html
Typical Roman atrium house
Although this is the not the blueprint for the House of the Faun, the house we visited, it gives a good general structure for the typical Rome atrium house. 1-atrium 2-peristylum 3-vestibule 4-fauces 5-impluvium 6-alae 7-triclinium 8-tablinium 9-exedra 10-taberna 11-cubiculum 12-andron 13-posticum 14-bathroom 15-cucina

Directly opposite the fauces side of the atrium lay the tablinium, a large reception room used by the paterfamilias in daily business transactions. It had little, if any, separation from the atrium in front of it and existed more as a continuation of the atrium rather than as a room of its own. Behind the tablinium was the peristylum, an open courtyard surrounded by high walls ensuring family security. Like the compluvium, the garden of the peristylum acted as a water-conversation mechanism. Excess rainwater from here also flowed into the underground cisterns. Herbs, flowers, and shrubs were planted within the garden, scattered with decorative fountains, statuettes, and ornamental artwork. The garden was surrounded on four sides by colonnades. The exedra, similar in relation to the peristylum as the tablinium was to the atrium, was also more a continuation of the peristylum than a separate room. Often the site of lavish dinner parties and used as a formal entertainment room, the spacious room, like the peristylum, was derived from the Greeks. Other rooms in this latter half of the house included the triclinium, the Roman dining room. The average house possessed more than one triclinium, allowing the family to choose which room to eat in on a particular day. The culina, or kitchen, was located in close proximity to the bathroom and peristylum; the closeness of the two rooms allowed maximum efficiency in water usage. The culina, small, dark, and poorly ventilated, was often put in an obscure location, as cooking and cleaning were done by slaves only.

Other parts of the house included the andron, the passageway connecting the atrium to the peristylum, as well as the posticum, the servants’ entrance located on the side of the house. In front of the house on both sides of the fauces were tabernas, rooms rented out to others as private shops; sometimes these shops were connected to the house. These rooms could also serve other functions, such as storage for the household.

III. Function
As the center of activity, the atrium was the most important room in the house. Not only was it the room in which clients waited to be received by the paterfamilias, but it was also the location for the most important household goods, including the lararium which housed the family lars (god), the household safe, and the marriage bed.

In addition, the atrium served as the setting for significant rituals for the entire household, rituals that acted not only to honor the family lars, but also to emphasize the power of the paterfamilias to the household members. It is important to note that these rituals included all members of the household, family slaves and intimate clients alike; the paterfamilias possessed power over all those living under his roof. Rituals included the tollere, whereby a newborn child was chosen by the paterfamilias to be a member of the family. Once chosen, the child was recognized as a legitimate member of the household and became subject to authority of the paterfamilias. Another ritual was the Liberalia, the rite of passage for boys around the age of 16 or 17. In this ceremony, the boys offered their toga and amulet to the family lars and thereby accepted the new toga of manhood. In addition, the marriage ceremony in which the new couple shared their sacred cake with the family lars, was held in the atrium of the husband’s home. Although the bride remained under the control of her own paterfamilias, she was received by the family and ancestors of her husband.

http://www.mmdtkw.org/01-03FamiliaRomana1.jpg
The Roman family
The typical Roman family consisted not only of blood relatives, but also slaves, intimate clients, and close friends.

http://wings.buffalo.edu/AandL/Maecenas/italy_except_rome_and_sicily/pompeii/ac880830.html
House of the Faun atrium
The atrium was the setting for some of the family's most important rituals.
The roof of the House of Faun atrium is missing, but the impluvium remains in the center.

Items found in the atrium also reveal its existence as a communal room for the family. Inkwells and styli were among the pieces discovered, suggesting its use as a classroom for the children. Dolls and flutes indicate its function as an entertainment and playroom. , Spoons, and glasses point to signs of it acting as a domestic space as well.

IV. Patron
At the time of the eruption of Mt. Vesuvius in 79 AD, Roman civilization had experienced a movement away from the aristocracy of the Republic to the more centralized and bureaucratic government of the Empire. In Pompeii, however, there is little evidence that suggests that this governmental shift had effected a change in the form of the Roman atrium house. Compared to the insulas (apartments) discovered in Rome and Ostia at the time, an overwhelming number of homes containing essential elements of the atrium-style houses were found among the Pompeiian ruins, indicating that the paterfamilias still engaged in Republican patron-client relationships.

The existence of the paterfamilias as both a household leader and a patron, was very much alive in 79 AD Pompeii. The morning salutation, in which the client visited the home of the patron to either pay or get paid by him, was essential to the establishment of the credibility and power of the paterfamilias. The extent of the furnishing and adornment of the house, especially along the linear visual axis of the fauces-atrium-tablinium, was a direct reflection of the household’s wealth and prestige. From the minute the client entered the home of his patron, he immediately became subject to this axis. In the fauces he would see images of the household lars or the goddess Medusa, symbolizing the existence of divine protection over the home. A guard dog or a doorman at the end of the entryway indicated the wealth of the household. While waiting to be received in the atrium and seeing the beautiful frescoes decorating the room, the intricate mosaics surrounding the impluvium, and the gilded ceilings and furniture, he would sense the prosperity and strength of the family. In addition to all the grandeur surrounding him, directly in his line of sight lay the tablinium, where the paterfamilias, the source of the wealth of the home – and of his own income – sat waiting for him. Even in moving around the public space of the house, each move he made upon entering was under the close eye of the paterfamilias; no matter where he went, he was subject to the influence of the linear visual axis and thus controlled by the paterfamilias. The house, then, functioned to establish what is commonly known as “the matrix of the authority of the father.” Not only does the atrium itself, replete with its rituals and functions, reinforce the role of the omnipotent paterfamilias, but the entirety of the public space of the house serves to emphasize the position of the paterfamilias in the tablinium, both psychologically and physically.

http://wings.buffalo.edu/AandL/Maecenas/italy_except_rome_and_sicily/pompeii/ac880832.html
House of the Faun tablinium
The tablinium, at the far end of the linear fauces-atrium-tablinium axis,
was often elevated in height in order to create a sense of visual heirarchy.

V. Conclusion
The aforementioned linear fauces-atrium-tablinium visual axis easily carried over into the Roman government and also into the Christian church. In Roman palaces, basilicas and Christian churches, there often exists an alignment of the entrance hall with light filtering into the main room from overhead natural light sources and the figure with the highest authority standing at the end of the axis. As the visitor enters through the doorway, his eyes are drawn to the majesty around him; the beautiful decorations of both the entryway and the main room magnify the grandeur of the site, illuminating the power and wealth of the patron, the Roman government or the deities of the church. Directly across the room, slightly elevated as to create a sense of hierarchy, lies the statue of the emperor in reign or the god in sanctuary. As a continuation of the figure of the paterfamilias, this figure, a static presence on the stage, can observe all the activity in front of him from the moment the visitor enters the building until the moment he leaves. From his command post, he exercises his authority over the entire structure.

In modern architecture, the atrium is used as a greeting center, a more open space, often with a fountain in the middle, reminiscent of the Roman impluvium.

Nicole Day-Bazhaw
Church atrium
Atrium of San Clemente. Note the open ceiling and fountain in the middle.
The double doors lead to the interior of the church.

http://www.udel.edu/ArtHistory/nees/209/images/4-02.jpg
Santa Sabina interior
The view from the entrance. Note that light filters in along the periphery of the visual linear axis.
At the end of the line of sight lies the alter. Note that it is slightly elevated in the same manner as the tablinium.

VI. Personal Observations
As a Biochemistry student, I am interested in form and function – why a molecule is shaped a certain way, how it fits into biochemical processes, and the role it plays in maximizing human efficiency. For that reason, I chose to research the topic of the Roman atrium house, specifically its form and function. Each aspect of the Roman atrium house is designed for a specific purpose that is either practical or symbolical. For example, the length of the corridors and the positions of the tabernas minimize the amount of noise and smell coming from the street; the impluvium and compluvium work in collaboration to conserve water and bring light to the space; most importantly, the linear visual axis of the fauces-atrium-tablinium establishes the “matrix of the authority of the father.”

http://sights.seindal.dk/photo/9587.html
House of the Faun
View of the fauces from inside the house

Because my site was not in Rome but Pompeii, I was unable to visit it before giving my presentation. When we finally arrived at the House of the Faun (the house chosen for my presentation), my understanding of the use of space in the Roman atrium house was uplifted. Instead of viewing the house as individual pictures found in books or over the internet pieced together, I was able to see the house as a continuous whole. The phrase “move through the space” is used so commonly in this class that it has become somewhat cliché. I discovered, however, that a genuine understanding Roman architecture and use of space is impossible without a firsthand experience of how the building affects the movement of its visitor. I had to see the linear visual axis for myself, observe the raised position of the tablinium, and experience the effect of the lighting on the peristylum half of the house in order to fully comprehend the form and function of the Roman atrium house.

VII. Bibliography
1) Gazda, Elaine K. Roman Art in the Private Sphere. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1991.

2) Cannatella, Anna-Maria. Within the Atrium. Brunswick, Maine: Bowdoin College Museum of Art, 1997.

3) Wallace-Hadrill, Andrew. Houses and Society in Pompeii and Herculaneum. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1994

4) “The Roman house.” http://www.roman-empire.net/society/soc-house.html

5) Wang, Liu Jia and Kris Wright. “The Roman Atrium.” Bowdoin College. 2000. http://academic.bowdoin.edu/classics/research/wangwright/index.shtml

6) “A Roman House.” http://library.thinkquest.org/10098/romanhouse.htm

7) “House of the Faun.” http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/1097_House_of_the_Faun.html

Fascism and The Via Dei Fori Imperiali

Joel Nishimura
Honors in Rome - Summer 2005

I. Introduction

Americans seem to easily confuse Fascism with Nazism, and though there are parallels between them they are actually quite separate phenomena. Fascism (with a capital F) is a wholly Italian phenomenoninvention that developed a decade before Nazism. As brutal and violent as Fascism was, it pales in comparison to Nazism. This however, doesn’t changethe fact that Fascism is easy to demonize, as it takes at its core a rejection of many of the values that are at the core of our modern understanding of moral governance. Yet the Italians embraced Fascism and proceeded to tolerate it for more than two decades. What would compel Italians to do this?

In an attempt to answer this question we look at one of the leftovers of the Fascist regime, the road that now bears the harmless name, via dei Fori Imperiali (Road of the Imperial Forum), but was christened the via dell’Impero(Empire Street) in 1932 during the height of Italian Fascism. By exploring the fascist use and intention of the via dell’Impero we will explore the pathos behind the appeal of the Fascist movement and Fascism’s relationship with history. However, first it is important to see the context in which Fascist Italy arose.

It is impossible to separate Fascism from Benito Mussolini, who brought Fascism from obscurity to dominance in just a few years. In 1919 Fascists received less than 5000 votes in a nationwide election, yet by 1922 Benito Mussolini was prime minister. This incredibly rapid rise suggests that Fascism filled a significant political void.

Indeed one thing that Fascism offered was a strong national identity. If Fascism was anything it was nationalistic and this was something that Italy, a relatively young country, was particularly susceptible to. The unification of Italy or Risorgimento, occurred from 1848-1870 and was the first time Italy had been unified since the days of the Roman Empire. Then came World War One. Despite fighting on the victorious side, Italy was denied many of the gains that other allied powers received, emerging deeply indebted to America and Britain. Italy also lacked the collection of colonies that England and France had. Simply put, Italy was weak and its citizens knew it. Fascism was able to exploit this, claiming that Italy was weak because it had been ruled by a weak constitutional monarchy and promised to restore the strength and honor they felt was Rome’s birthright.

Yet a Fascist revolution was perhaps more due to the perceived communist threat. After the First World War violent Bolsheviks began attacking capitalist and government building with increasing frequency. The fear that this communist threat created in the rest of Italy is hard to underestimate. It was in this context that the Fascist movement really found their foothold, as extremely violent anti-Bolsheviks. Fascists would target labor unions, worker rallies, newspapers and anything else that seemed vaguely communist. Operating under the theory that violence must be met with greater violence the country devolved into a state of semi-chaos. Scared of the Bolsheviks the liberal government sided with Mussolini, continually compromising to his ever-greater demands and threats.

This culminated in the “March on Rome” where the Fascists supposedly grasped power on October 28th 1922. This event would become the founding myth of the Fascist regime, and myth truly is the right word. Fascists would remember this date as the day when Mussolini led 40,000 brave Fascists black shirts in a violent and brutal battle for the capital. During the fighting no less than 3,000 martyrs died in the name of Fascism. The actual history of the March on Rome though was far more spectacle than battle. Mussolini had mustered around 40,000 black shirt Fascists and declared he was going to take Rome. However, before committing the March Mussolini actually received a telegram sent by the King Vittorio Emanuele III asking him to form a new government. Mussolini then rode into Rome from Milan in a sleeper train and paraded his forces to the center of Rome. The police and the army stood aside while this happened but photographers and journalists were out in full force. In essence the myth was created to assure the people that Fascism was in power because it had the power and initiative to take it. After all the bravado the Fascists preached anything less than a violent revolution might have seemed a copout.

Politically, Fascism tried to portray itself as a “third way” that was neither capitalist nor communist. To many capitalism had proven itself ineffective, but to the middle and upper classes communism certainly wasn’t an option. Ideally, under Fascism elements from both capitalism and socialism would be combined to create a system in which all classes strived and competed for the glory of the state. Yet the key to understand Fascism is to understand the main shift from an emphasis on the individual to an emphasis on the glory and strength of the state. Once this shift is understood it tends to lead to a type of “ends justify means” type thought process. From this perspective the Fascist use of violence, the focus on imperialism, the lack of consistent doctrine and the militarism all make sense.

In order to justify this philosophical foundation of Fascism the Fascists instituted huge reconstructions of Rome and several major building programs. One of the key remnants of this is the via dei Fori Imperiali.


II. Description

A large four lane Avenue with wide sidewalks the via dei Fori Imperiali begins at the Piazza Venezia and leads to the Colosseum. Along the way the via dei fori Imperiali cuts a large swath through the center of ancient Rome, dividing the Forums of Trajan and Augustus from the Roman Forum and Caesar’s Forum and covering the Forums of Nerva and Vespavian. This provides for an incredible view of the most important sights in ancient Rome. Not only are the forums clearly visible but the Palentine also rises in the distance, displaying the home of the Roman Emperors. Additionally the giant Basilica Constantine shadows the road. The road also is linked to Mussolini’s Fascist government because the road starts at the piazza Venezia, where Mussolini had his office moved to in 1929. In fact this piazza was the location of many of Mussolini’s most significant political speeches and was symbolically the center of Fascist power.

On the sides of the road stand large bronze statues of the most famous Roman emperors. The bases of these statues are inscribed with the names of the Emperors, the letters S.P.Q.R, and a declaration that they were produced during the tenth year of the Fascist rule. Further along the road there are a series of four large marble maps, displaying the expanse of the Roman Empire in white, un-Roman land as black, and the sea as grey. The first map displays a single white dot symbolizing the city of Rome before any expansion. The second map displays the size of the empire after the Punic wars, while the third and fourth maps are of the empire at Augustus’s death and during the reign of Trajan respectively. These maps were added in 1934, two years after the opening of the road.

A fifth map was also added in 1935 but was later taken down after World War II. This map displayed the expanse of the Italian empire under Mussolini, highlighting the expansion into Ethiopia. The original location of this map is still evident though from the coloration of the brick that it originally covered.

The road was constructed in just eleven months, at breakneck speeds in order to be completed in time for the tenth anniversary of the March on Rome. The construction of this road was a major undertaking, as it demanded the destruction of much of the Pantani sector of the city. In many cases the tops of buildings were simply lopped off and the basements filled when the road was built. In total five ancient churches were dismantled and several large tenements were destroyed, displaying thousands.

To the modern visitor it is a frustrating contraption, providing an annoying artificial barrier that fills the air with soot and noise. The pure practicality of the road destroys whatever hopes there is of unifying ancient Rome into a single ancient park. In the words of the urban planning critic Henry Hope Reed:

As one of the most ambitious of Mussolini’s attempts to re-create in Rome the city of the ancients, it is only fair to the planners to say that the Dictator traced the line of it himself, and boasted that it was constructed at his will. The only comment worth making on this carefully and extensively laid-out waste is that, with its concrete paths leading nowhere and its municipal lamp standards lighting up nothing, it is the most symbolic and fitting memorial to a dictatorship in existence.


Yet during the Fascist regime the road held a deep symbolic meaning, physically linking Mussolini’s government with the ruins of ancient Rome. By exploring the fascist use and intention of the via dell’Impero we will in fact explore the pathos behind the appeal of the Fascist movement.


III. Function

For the Fascists the construction of the via dell’Impero was always thought of in terms of ritual, the fact that the road would become a major thoroughfare was less important. The road provided an amazing venue on which to recreate the historic March on Rome and simultaneously link in space and ritual the government of Fascism to that of Imperial Rome.

The opening celebrations of the via dell’Impero occurred on October 28th 1932, the tenth anniversary of the March on Rome. The celebrations included a large march of 17,000 veterans of the March on Rome parading down the road in their black shirt Fascist uniforms marching in Italian goosestep. Additional soldiers where placed alongside the road. The whole event was to become an annual rebirth of the Fascist regime, reminding the world that Fascism ruled because it was powerful.

It is hard to underestimate the importance that ritual held in the Fascist regime. Ritual was the mechanism that reinforced the principles of Fascism and provided convenient platforms with which to frame future plans. The power of the ritual not only came from the strength and persuasiveness of the spectacle but also from the manner that the spectacle was continually reinforced through media and documentation.

Indeed Mussolini was a master of propaganda. Using a sort of “combined arms” approach he was able to create and control a message unlike anything the world had ever seen before. For example, Mussolini would give a speech on a historic date, which would be covered by state radio, reprinted in newspapers he controlled, turned into slogans by his party, which were then found on posters, graffiti, and repeated in chants.

Yet the setting for the via dell’Impero further increased the power of its spectacle. The veterans were parading through the ruins of Ancient Rome, prominently displaying the ruins and merging the idea of Ancient Rome with that of the Fascist regime. Indeed Fascists saw themselves as the natural heirs to the Roman Empire. Both Fascist Italy and Ancient Rome were militaristic, imperial authoritarian states. More importantly perhaps was the emphasis both placed on ideas of glory, honor, and strength. In essence Roman ruins were seen as the proof of Fascist doctrine, that ultimately it was power and strength that were remembered and worth celebrating. The offer to participate in Fascism was manipulated into an offer to participate in the next Roman Empire.

Several other aspects of the road contributed to this link between Fascism and ancient Rome. The statues of the Roman Emperors alongside the road where meant as a kind of validation of Mussolini’s dictatorial control, that Rome required an authoritarian dictator. The marble maps were designed to support Mussolini’s imperial ambitions, particularly his intended invasion of Ethiopia. In this way an aggressive war of expansion was put in the context of following Rome’s legacy. The stark contrast of white versus black echoed much of the rhetoric behind the justification of the invasion, that of civilizing the barbarous black hordes of Africa. This connection was made even clearer with the addition of the fifth map in 1935, which effectively declared the beginning of the new Roman Empire with Mussolini at its head.

We now see relatively clearly that the via dell’Impero provided a deep emotional message addressed to the Italian people, that through Fascism they were reviving the ancient Roman Empire. In essence the appeal was the recreation of grandeur, pride and stability—an understanding that through Fascism the individual would be able to transcend his meekness and participate in something that be as immortal as the ruins of the Roman Empire seem to be. This combined with the simple ability of Fascism to organize the country’s infrastructure provided much of the persuasion that allowed Fascism to become so notoriously popular.


IV. Patron

Mussolini's Reconstruction of Rome

The ability of Ancient Rome to inspire was exploited by Mussolini throughout his reconstruction of Rome. In regards to his reconstruction of Rome Mussolini declared that it had two goals, functional and grand. In regards to grandeur Mussolini said

We must liberate all of ancient Rome from disfigurements. Next to the ancient and the medieval we must create the monumental Rome of the twentieth century. Rome cannot, must not simply be a modern city in the banal sense of the word. It must be a city worthy of its glory and this glory must be continuously renewed in order to be handed down as the heritage of the Fascist era to future generations.

Over the subsequent years not only would many Roman ruins be excavated but many of the new buildings that where constructed where influenced by the symbols and styles of ancient Rome. The Fascists excavated Trajan’s Forum, Caesar’s Forum, and the Largo di Argentina and repaired the Curia for example. Building surrounding the pantheon and the theater Marcellus were destroyed in order to provide better views. The ruins of ancient Rome also provided great venues to perform various Fascist events in. The Basilica Constantine was used for concerts, the colosseum for rallies, the Circus Maximus for exhibitions and the arch of Constantine for triumphal parades. In fact much of Fascist building plans were thought of in terms of the types of Fascists events that could be held there.

This excavation though would not have been possible without another of Mussolini’s projects, that of the sventramenti. This called for the destruction of much of medieval Rome and its replacement with either new modern buildings or excavations. While this was planed on a grand scale it would only be partially carried out.

Many of the newer buildings that were constructed during Mussolini’s reign where at least partially influenced by ancient Roman ruins. One of the most recurrent symbols in these buildings was the fasces, the ancient symbol of Roman power that gives Fascism its name. The fasces were a collection of bound rods that were stronger together than apart. Many of the buildings that were built during the Fascist reconstruction had distinctly modern designs and are relatively easy to pick out in Rome. Some of the most famous of these buildings are Rome’s university complex, sports complex and also the Esposizione Universale di Roma (EUR) located outside the city.

The effect of this reconstruction was heightened by the fact that internal tourism only really began to flourish under Fascism. Not only did the expanding infrastructure of Fascism facilitate tourism but also the government actively presented tourism as a way of patriotic expression.


V. Conclusion

In many ways the method in which Fascism used construction and reconstruction to build consensus for their government followed in the tradition set up 2,000 years by the Ancient Romans. Construction is again married with propaganda, where monumental architecture and ritual are designed in order to humble the spectator to the ideas of power, strength and endurance. It is on these terms that both the Ancient Romans and the modern Fascists made their emotional pitch to the masses.


VI. Personal Observations

While this paper has discussed the effect that Fascism had in shaping the message of the ruins the effect that the ruins had on the development of Fascism shouldn’t be trivialized. It must be more than simple coincidence that the first place that saw a fascist government was Rome. In fact, it is a common motif of Rome that people keep trying to restore to Rome the importance and power that it once had. It is an interesting play that exists between how history affects politics and in turn how politics shapes the way that history is viewed.

Another thing that was relatively surprising was the degree to which I was misinformed on Fascism. At the beginning of the project I simply assumed that Fascism was essentially Nazism’s small Italian offspring. This however turned out not to be true. In fact, most surprisingly Mussolini had a severe dislike for Hitler until the mid to late thirties.

Perhaps the most interesting thing though was simply the parallel that kept cropping up between the way that a political base was maintained in both Ancient Rome and Fascist Italy.


VII. Bibliography

Etlin, Richard A. “Modernism in Italian Architecture, 1890-1940.” Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1991. pp. 376-406.

Fogu, Claudio. “The Historic Imaginary: Politics of History in Fascist Italy.” Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press, 1963. pp. 21-35, 193-197.

Hibbert, Christopher. “Rome: The Biography of a City.” London, England: Penguin Books, 1985. pp. 286-302

Labsansky, Medina D. “The Renaissance Perfected: Architecture, Spectacle, and Tourism in Fascist Italy." University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004. pp. 3-17.

Minor, Heather Hyde. “Mapping Mussolini: Ritual and Cartography in the Second Roman Empire.” Imago Mundi, vol. 51. 1999. pp. 147-168. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0308-5694%281999%2951%3C147%3AMMRACI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-0

Lamb, Richard. The Introduction to Mussolini, Benito. “My Rise and My Fall.” New York, NY: Da Capo Press, 1998. pp. V-XXX.

Packer, James. “Review: Review Article: Politics, Urbanism, and Archaeology in ‘Roma Capitale’: A Troubled Past and a Controversial Future.” American Journal of Archeology, vol. 93. 1989. pp. 137-141. http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9114%28198901%2993%3A1%3C137%3ARAPUAA%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W

Von Henneberg, Krystyna Clara. “Monuments, Public Space and the Memory of Empire in Modern Italy.” History & Memory, vol. 16, no. 1: 2004. pp. 37-85.

Modern History Sourcebook. “Benito Mussolini: What is Fascism, 1932.” http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/mussolini-fascism.html, Accessed Sept 3rd 2005.

Wikipedia. “Mussolini.” http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0308-5694%281999%2951%3C147%3AMMRACI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-0 accessed Sept 4th 2005.

Augustus and his agenda

Minh-An Nguyen
Honors in Rome - Summer 2005
small presentation

I. Historical Background of the Site or Topic

Augustus or Caeser Augustus was known by many names such as Gaius Octavius, the name given to him when he was born on September 23, 63BC. He was the great nephew of Julius Caesar and it was Julius who helped launch Augustus’ career. Even at a young age of 12 years old, Augustus was giving public speeches. Most importantly upon Julius Caesar’s assassination, in his will Julius Caesar adopted Augustus as his son and made him his chief personal heir. Therefore, at Julius Caesar’s death, Augustus at only an age of 18 years old had to make the choice to either take this inheritance or not. He decided to take up the challenge and from that point on was known as Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianius or Octavian for short. Mark Antony did not welcome this because he thought he would be the next ruler, but with Augustus’s perseverance and patience, he gradually began his quest to win the allegiance of the public. Augustus let go of his grudge against Mark Antony and formed an agreement with Antony and Lepidus to form the Second triumvirate, the first being the one with Julius Caesar.

However, the triumvirate did not last for long as power began to shift between the three and at 32 BC it officially ended. By that time Augustus had gradually built up his image of being the best candidate to be the next ruler. He requested the deifying of Julius Caesar, which in turn resulted in him being the “Divi Filitus,” the son of a god. He also built statues to show his grandeur and had many military successes to compete with Antony’s military seniority, such as winning foreign wars in Ilyricum and Dalmatia to protect the borders of Italy. Noticing a weakness in his opponents, Augustus defeated and took the land of Lepidus and parts of Antony’s. Antony now had taken allegiance with Cleopatra, which caused Augustus to declare war. He eventually defeated Cleopatra and Antony at the Battle of Actium, which led to them committing suicide. When he captured Egypt and seized Cleopatra’s treasures, he was able to have the needed funds to become the master of the Greco-Roman world.


When he came to power, he had to decide what kind of government he wanted. He came into power during a time of much civil war and disorder that only provided more evidence that the old republican form had failed and that an absolute monarchy was needed. However, he knew that going against the Roman tradition would create much hostility. Still remembering the cause of Julius Caesar’s assassination, he knew he had to treat the Senate with care and consideration. His idea of a new government system, the new order, was better supported because of his clever decision to proclaim that he was transferring the power to the Senate and the people. However, before his announcement, he had already made deep connections with the members of the Senate and had much influence and control. The Senate gave him power or a special imperium for a period of ten years, which was quite unusual for that time. With that power, he was able to nominate Senate members. The senate also gave him the name of Augustus. Augustus was a name that had never been used to call a man because of what it represented. It comes from the word augury which is a practice of reading omens; therefore, being named this meant the belief of his superiority. He was also titled Imperator, also known as Emperor in modern times. However, he did not use this title but preferred to be called the Princeps or the first citizen. This way he stayed away from any word that would have any connotation of monarchy or supremacy. He was also awarded many other positions of power such as the power of tribune, which was the title of the defender of the poor and allowed him superiority over proconsuls and was called the “father of the country.” In 12 BC upon the death of Lepidus, one of the triumvirate, Augustus became the official head of the Roman religion, the chief priest (pontifex maximus).

During his rule, he accomplished many things for the Roman Empire. He wanted to improve religious beliefs. He revitalized the Roman religions by building many buildings and monuments to worship the Roman gods. He wanted to bring back the glamour of Rome and help the poor. He built many public buildings and monuments at his own expense such as baths, theaters, aqueducts, and better roads to promote better trade. Lastly, he wanted to increase morality by promoting marriage, family and childbirth. One of his famous quotes was that he “he found Rome brick and left it marble” because he literally and metaphorically had accomplished this.

He later created a new financial system that completely changed the administrative structure of the empire – a central treasury. He implemented two direct taxes, the poll tax (all adults) and a land tax but these were low and allowed for trade to flourish. He also created a military treasure, a fire brigade, and a police force.

Augustus is known as one of the greatest administrative genius of history. His reign was from 27 BC to 14 AD. He was able to reorganize almost every part of Roman life and transformed the dying republic to a stable expanded monarchic regime that had prosperous trade and a period of pax romana or Roman peace. His cleverness allowed him to rule under autocracy while still being supported by the people. It was with his clever use of propaganda through writers, monuments, statues and any other means possible that allowed him to remain in power so long and accomplish so much. Throughout his career, he was able to inderectly influence and control the decisions made while still having the public’s support and adoration.


II. Bibliography

"Augustus." Britannica Encyclopedia. 1986.

“Caesar Augustus.” Answers.com. 28 August 2005 topiccaesar-augustus>.

Rowell, Henry Thompson. “Rome in the Augustan Age.” University of Oklahoma Press: Norman, 1962.

The Roman Forum

Justin Vincent
Honors in Rome - Summer 2005

I. Introduction

The Fora Romana was symbolically the center of Roman government and as such, the perfect location for emperors to erect buildings with a propagandistic intent. In looking at the sites today, though mainly in ruins, one can still feel the overpowering influence they exert. To an ancient Roman the overpowering structure of the forum would have left the observer with little doubt of Rome’s supremacy, humbling him before Rome’s grandeur. With both religious and governmental buildings placed in the Forum, the location served as a center to all that represented Rome. Buildings erected within the Forum therefore served as central symbols of Rome, and due to this politicians could shift perception of the empire by erecting monuments in the Forum which gave the location immense political importance.

Beginnings

The original inhabitants of Rome settled on the Palatine. This was a prime location as it was close to the Tiber, but still elevated as to protect the settlement from the rivers frequent flooding and foreign attack. Upon original inhabitation the area of the forum was initially a swamp, and its use was mainly as a necropolis, with tombs dating from the 10th century BC. Eventually however, the room on hills was at a premium, and thus some inhabitants started to move down into the Forum, living in the round Etruscan style huts. The first step towards making the Forum what it is today however was undertaken around the 6th century BC, when the Tarquin kings, with knowledge of drainage gained from the east, built the Cloaca Maxima, or great drain. This drained the inhospitable marsh, and along with an initial paving in that period, made the location well situated to become the center of an expanding Rome.

II. Structures: Pre-Imperial

Though these buildings were originally created before imperial Rome the versions today, save the Lapis Niger, are usually reconstructions. This is due to fires which were dangerously common in Rome, as well as just general reconstructions by politicians wanting to show their benevolence and gain favor with the populace.

Lapis Niger
The Lapis Niger is an area of bluish grey stone, and its origins are permeated with myth. The commonly held belief is that it is the tomb of Romulus, while there are other opinions that it holds the tomb of the shepherd who discovered Romulus and Remus. There is no evidence of a tomb however, and thus it is somewhat of a mystery. While there is currently no definitive answer as to the area’s true purpose, within the vault beneath the marble slabs there in the earliest known Latin writing, dating from the 6th century BC. The writings apparently detail some sort of ritual and though the Lapis Niger has unclear origins, the presence of these writings makes it a very important monument.

Rostra
The Rostra is an elevated platform from which the early kings of Rome gave their speeches, an early example of the Forum as political center. Along its front one can see small square indentations, which are from occasions where the prows of enemy ships were stuck into the Rostra by the metal beams which ran down the hull. In this one sees the reoccurring Roman tradition of bringing symbols of conquests back to Rome in order to gain support for foreign campaigns, a practice which reached its height in the Triumph. The Roman conquerors needed these symbols of conquest in order to give the Romans a sense of accomplishment in waging wars which were often far detached from the lives of an average Roman and his security. This is also the location from which Marc Anthony gave his famous speech defending Caesar after his assassination.

Temple of the Vestal Virgins
The vestal virgin tradition was a sacred one to the Romans, with the vestals an icon of purity. Their charge was to keep the flame in the temple of Vesta from extinguishing, as Rome was supposed to be impervious as long as it remained lit. The appointment, which one gained in early childhood, was for thirty years, 10 spent learning the rituals, 10 spent performing them, and 10 spent teaching them to the next generation. During this period, strict chastity was required and if a virgin was even accused of chastity she would be buried alive unless a sign from Vesta herself was observed in her defense. The male would be flogged to death.

The temple, of which only three columns have been reconstructed, was circular in shape, a style inherited from the round shape of the early Etruscan huts in the area. Along the top there are icons representing various acts of sacrifice. Inside the temple there were deep pits which held the offal left over from the animal sacrifices performed in the temple. Also in the temple there was a cache holding various treasures, one of which legend says to be the Palladium brought over by Aenid when he fled Troy.

Temple of Saturn
The temple of Saturn is second only to the temple of Vesta in age, with its origins dating back to the Tarquin kings. As was mentioned, the version of the temple that stands today was an imperial rebuild and the massive granite portico that remains dates to the fourth century AD. In addition to serving as a temple, it was also the treasury of empire, and a location for the posting of public documents. Within the temple was a statue of Saturn brought out for Triumphal processions.


III. Structures: Post-Imperial

Curia
This was the senate house, moved to its current location by Julius Caesar. It is interesting to consider the message sent by Julius moving the position of the senate house to make way for his massive building projects. Within the curia, the three-hundred senators met for their formal meetings, with the president of the senate sitting in the back of the room.

The Curia is so well preserved due to its conversion to the Church of Saint Adriano. This conversion is responsible for the remarkable shape it is in now, just as many other buildings survived by being turned into churches. The church, as we will see, was responsible for much of the preservation, but also destruction, of the Forum.

Basilica Julia
A basilica in Roman times was an economic and judicial center, built for oratory and protection from the elements. This basilica would likely have had wooden removable barriers so that more cases could be heard at one time. If one looks at the steps of the Basilica, there are still the remains of game boards carved into the marble, evidence that the Basilica was very much a public space.

This is one of the many public works Caesar had built, which put him into an enormous amount of debt. The payoff for these expenditures was substantial though, such that upon his self appointment to dictator for life there was little opposition from the lower classes, to whom Caesar was a hero. The tradition of massive expenditures to win over the population via building projects started with Caesar, and was continued by most of the later emperors.

Temple of the Divine Julius
To understand the significance of the temple, the Roman climate around the time of its construction needs to be considered. The beginnings of the rift that was to cause the rise of an empire can be traced back to the feuds between the Optimates and the Populates. These two groups can be put roughly into the category of conservatives and populists, one wanting supremacy of the senate and headed by Sulla, the Optimates, and one wanting more involvement of the people and headed by Marius, the Populates. This rift was brought to the brink of violence when Sulla threatened to march on Rome, resulting in him being proclaimed dictator for ten years, a position normally given only in times of emergency for a six month period. Furthering the discord of the period was Spartacus’ slave rebellion, which was put down by Crassus. Crassus, a Populate, along with Pompey, a protégé of Sulla, were co-consuls and potentially set to erupt into another feud such of that of Marius and Sulla. They were instead brought into an alliance though by Julius Caesar, who was running for Consulship and agreed to fight for their political views in exchange for their support. Caesar was easily elected consul, and upon the end of his term, helped Crassus and Pompey again obtain the consulship. The alliance of tree, known as the First Triumvirate, fell apart however with the death of Marius and the Optimates pushing Pompey to try and impeach Caesar. As a result, when Caesar tried to return to Rome after his military campaign in Gaul a civil war erupted, which Pompey decisively lost. After this victory, Caesar returned to Rome and granted himself dictator for one year, ten years, and finally for life. Though Caesar had the large-scale support of the population in these actions, he understandably angered too many senators in and was subsequently assassinated. This vacuum sent Rome into a violent power struggle from which Augustus emerged on top after numerous political twists and backstabs. Augustus gave his powers back to the senate, but the senate returned those power (or was maybe forced to), and thus Augustus became the first emperor of Rome.

After all those tumultuous years during which Roman government shifted from a republic to an empire, Augustus had to establish his legitimacy to the people. The most important symbol of this was the Temple of Divine Julius. In a completely unprecedented action, Augustus had Caesar deified, something which had never been done in Rome save for the myth of Romulus. This practice of deifying politicians in order to legitimate one’s line is a practice later repeated many times, and its effectiveness should not be underestimated.

Temple of Vespasian and Titus
This was another deification temple built by Domitian to honor his brother Titus and father Vespasius. Vespasius came to rule after the two terribly unpopular emperors Nero and Caligula, which was then followed by the chaotic “Year of Four Emperors”. This time of great chaos was finally brought to order by Vespasius. After that fiasco Romans would plausibly be having great doubts in the effectiveness of the rule by emperor, so again we see this deification ritual as a way to reestablish the legitimacy of the system after a time of great chaos.



IV. Downfall

With the downfall of the Roman Empire there was insufficient infrastructure in Rome to maintain the forum. Following a series of natural disasters which broke the sewage system, the roman forum began to fill with sediment and by the middle ages was a husk of its former glory. It was no longer known as the forum, but instead as the Campo Vacino, or cow pasture. The arches were halfway submerged in muck, and some of the structures were incorporated into medieval fortifications.

The greatest devastation took place however during the middle ages, when the site became a quarry for large-scale papal building such as St. Peter’s Basilica. This was a terrible time for the forum, but it shouldn’t be forgotten that financing the original forum was in large part due to spoils of was and sackings of foreign treasures, so the forum becoming a quarry for the church does seem a particularly Roman end.


V. Conclusion

The Roman forum is a monumental work of propaganda whose scope seems unmatched in the modern world. Today as one explores the great site, it seems hard to get a sense of continuity within the jumbled ruins. In a way though, that is the point of the Forum. The Forum exerted its power over the population by being a canvas with which politicians could give the message that would bring the most stability at that time, and thus the piecemeal appearance of the Forum is a reflection of the ever changing demands of the populous.

VI. Bibliography

Claridge, Amanda, and Barry Cunliffe. Oxford Archeological Guides: Rome. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Garwood, Duncan, and Kristin Kimball. Lonely Planet: Rome. Footscray Victoria: Lonely Planet Publications, 2004.

Gilbert, Sari, and Michael Brause. National Geographic Traveler: Rome. Washington D.C.: National Geographic Society, 2003.

Grant, Michael. The Roman Forum. NewYork: Macmillan Publishing, 1970.

http://sights.seindal.dk/sight/4_forum_romanum.html

http://www.vroma.org/~forum/forum.html

http://www.archeoroma.com/Foro%20Romano/Lapis_Niger/lapisniger1.JPG

http://www.vroma.org/images/mcmanus_images/rostra_beaks.gif

http://www.portafortuna.com/A5558E/portafortuna.nsf/romevestals.jpg

http://www.cavazzi.com/roman-empire/tours/rome/pictures/temple-saturn-01.jpg

http://www.romancoins.info/Bau-Curia-Julia-Augustus.jpg

http://intranet.grundel.nl/thinkquest/uit_julia.jpg

http://www.azcanada.com/photoblog/photos/DSC01153.jpg

http://www.uwm.edu/~cgalvao/campovaccino.JPG

http://www.shunya.net/Pictures/Italia/st-peters-basilica.jpg

http://intranet.grundel.nl/thinkquest/

Basilicas in Ancient Rome

Leah Schrager
Honors in Rome - Summer 2005
small presentation

Historical Background of the Site or Topic

The Latin word basilica was derived from the Greek “basilike stoa.” “Basilike” is an adjective meaning kingly or royal, qualifying the noun “stoa,” an open aired portico. The term basilica refers to the function of a building as that of a meeting hall. In ancient Rome, basilicas were the site for legal matters to be carried out and a place for business transactions.



Architecturally, a basilica typically had a rectangular base that was split into aisles by columns and covered by a roof. Main features were named when the church adopted the basilical structure. The immense central aisle came to be called the nave. Side aisles were divided by colonnades (rows of evenly spaced columns). The apse is a recess or projection where the magistrate was seated or where a statue of the emperor was placed. Windows above the central aisle allowed light to penetrate inside the structure became known as clerestory windows.

Scholars disagree over the location and date of the first basilica. Early basilicas and approximate dates are the Basilic Porcia in Rome (184 BCE), Basilica Aemilia in the Roman Forum (179 BCE), and the basilica in Pompeii (second half of the second century BCE).

This short presentation took place in the Roman Forum at the site of Basilica of Maxentius and Constantine. Even after researching the immensity of the basilica previous to visiting the site, I was astounded and excited by the immensity of the stone fragments. Crossing the threshold to the site gave the visitor an idea of what a fabulous, huge building it once was. This basilica once provided a reprieve from the outside world by blocking out street noises and cooling the visitor with its shade. The construction of this basilica was begun by Maxentius in 308 CE. After Constantine defeated Maxentius in 312 CE, Constantine finished construction. The central nave measured 80x25 meters and was covered by three groin vaults of 35 m. Eight Corinthian columns of 14.5 meters supported the structure. Of the original building, three vaults of the north aisle remain. The vaults of the south and central nave collapsed in an earthquake in 847 CE. However, the floor plan remains clearly visible giving a vivid impression of its immense grandeur. The Basilica of Maxentius and Constantine is atypical due to its similarities with the architecture of Roman baths; most basilicas have flat ceilings.

Part of the reason a date for the earliest basilica is not agreed upon is that it is likely that Romans encountered the basilica in the Greek context and adopted it because it was so well suited for their legislative and commercial needs (Sear). On example of a Greek structure similar in layout was built by Vitruvius. The Greek background to Etruscan art also helps explain Rome’s acceptance of Greek art and architecture.

Vitruvius’ "De architectura" is the only surviving ancient treatise on architecture, likely written between 28 and 23 BCE. In it Vitruvius outlines six fundamental principles of architecture, of which two primary ones are symmetry and eurthymia. Eurythmia is broken down into "eu", good, and "rythmos", shape. Eurythmia means gracefulness that leads to visual harmony. Typically symmetry and eurythmia go hand in hand, but Vitruvius’ states that modifications to the symmetry of a work may be made in order to attain greater eurythmia. Symmetry is broken down into the roots "sym", meaning coming together and "metron", meaning measure. While today we may think of symmetry as an object with mirror images on either side of an axis, the Greek concept of symmetry was based on the proper agreement between members of the work itself. Symmetry, according to Vitruvius, is measurable, absolute, and reproducible. This is a reflection of ancient Greek philosopher Plato, who thought that measure and proportion in form will lead to beauty. Symmetry is thus one of the most deeply rooted and continuous features of Greco-Roman thought, philosophically, artistically and aesthetically.

Similarly, according to Vitruvius, the composition of the human body is such that well-shaped man has a precise relation between its members. (Rowland, 47) The most beautiful bodies were expected to be those that fall into certain measurements, proportions, and ratios. As anybody who has pulled a one Euro coin out of their pocket knows, the Vitruvian man is everywhere. The Vitruvian man is the human body inscribed perfectly in a circle to point out the correct proportions. Correct measurements are listed in Vitruvius’ drawing. Thus analysis of the symmetry of the human body correlates to the building of massive meeting halls based on similar rules of proportion.

Basilical architecture is deeply rooted in the Roman’s aesthetic sense of form, beauty, and harmony. Upon entering a massive basilica the individual will feel tiny in comparison to the state, yet connected to the empire because each body and meeting hall was defined by similar tastes of symmetry. The basilica as a symbol of authority and social order is deeply rooted in the psyche of the Roman people.

Bibliography

Sear, Frank. "Roman Architecture." Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1983.

Rowland, Ingrid D. and Howe, Thomas Noble. "Vitruvius: Ten Books on Architecture." New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999.