DOCSLIB.ORG

SPOLIA. DAMNATIO and RENOVATIO MEMORIAE Dale

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

"SPOLIA. DAMNATIO" AND "RENOVATIO MEMORIAE" Author(s): Dale Kinney Source: Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, Vol. 42 (1997), pp. 117-148 Published by: University of Michigan Press for the American Academy in Rome Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4238749 Accessed: 26/07/2010 09:43 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aarome. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. American Academy in Rome and University of Michigan Press are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome. http://www.jstor.org SPOLIA.DAMNATIO AND RENOVATIOMEMORIAE Dale Kinney L ike most aspects of Roman artistic practice, the introductionof spolia occurred in si- lence. In retrospectit appearedto be an innovationof the Constantinianperiod, and for centuriesit was seen as a purelynegative development. Vasari, depending on earliersixteenth- century commentators,including Raphael,singled out the Arch of Constantineas an egre- gious demonstrationof the demise of artistic capability,evidenced not only by the pathetic efforts of its fourth-centuryfriezes but by its reuse of second-centuryreliefs,faute de mieux.1 It was not until the twentieth century,in the wake of Riegl, that Hans Peter L'Orangewas able to interpretthe Arch as a coherentexpression of earlyfourth-century ideas and thereby recuperateit as an authenticwork of art.2Vasari observed reuse in Constantinianarchitec- ture as well. Interestingly,his evaluationof spolia in the elevationsof fourth-centurychurch basilicaswas much less negative;he was more inclined to see the reuse of exotic non-Italian marbleand granite column shafts as a sign of residualgood taste.3But again, it was only in the twentieth century that an art-historicalinterpreter could define these colonnades as a purposefulaesthetic development.4 In the last two decadesspolia have become a growthfield of art history.This trend is part of a generalbroadening of the disciplinebeyond its traditionalpreoccupations with masters and masterpieces,to encompassa much wider varietyof productionand reception. Thus the newly intensivestudy of spolia has been accompaniedby equallyburgeoning interest in such mattersas the Romanmarble trade and the Romanreception of Greek statuary.Some of this scholarshiphas been brought to bear on spolia, but much of it has not. This article situates the origins of spolia in the context of some of this recent work and suggests that to do so forces a reconsideration,if not a final rejection,of unexaminedassumptions about the way the earliestspoliate monumentswere perceived.5 This paper originated in the preparation for a National 2 LOrange and van Gerkan. Endowment for the Humanities Summer Seminar on spolia that I had the pleasure to co-direct with Birgitta Vasari (as n. 1) 15. Lindros Wohl in 1993. I am grateful to the American Academy for hosting that seminar and to Anthony Cut- 4 F. W. Deichmann, "Siule und Ordnung in der ler for inviting me to give a first presentation of this ar- friihchristlichen Architektur," Romische Mitteilungen 55 gument at the conference "Beginning the Middle Ages: (1940) 114-30. Continuity and Change," sponsored by the Pennsylva- nia State University in 1994. 5 The recent monograph by L. De Lachenal, Spolia. Uso e reimpiegodell'antico dal III al XIVsecolo(Milan 1995), 1 G. Vasari, Le Vite de' pitu eccellenti pittori, scultori e usefully surveys an enormous range of specific instances architettori nelle redazioni del 1550 e 1568, ed. R. of spolia, but it does not analyze the concept or delve Bettarini and P. Barocchi, Testo, 2 (Florence 1967), into the pre-Constantinian background. The same may "Proemio delle Vite," 14. be said of the-also very useful-article by H. Saradi, 118 DALE KINNEY Fig. 1. Portraitrecut from an anta capital,Art Museum, Fig. 2. Portraitrecut from an anta capital, rearview, Princeton University,the Carl Otto von Kienbusch,Jr. Art Museum, Princeton University,the Carl Otto von Memorial Collection, 53-25 (photo Museum). Kienbusch,Jr. Memorial Collection, 53-25 (photo Museum). Definitions form a significant aspect of the problem, for it is increasingly clear that the modern designation spolia applies to only one form of a long and varied history of reuse. Any culture that produces artifacts from scarce or laboriously obtained materials is likely to reuse rather than discard them, but even so, the extent of Roman recycling is surprising. Remark- ably personal marble objects were reworked for second uses (or users), including grave stelai, ossuaries, honorific inscriptions, and altars.6 Sleights of carving transformed highly specific artifacts into quite different ones, for example, a female portrait with a big coil of braids into a bearded priest or an anta capital into a frowning man (figs. 1, 2).7 Art history has not recog- nized such reuse as spolia, partly because the concept is so firmly attached to late antiquity. But even within the Constantinian period, the modern identification of spolia is selective. The second-century reliefs with recut portrait heads on the Arch of Constantine (figs. 4, 20) "The Use of Ancient Spolia in Byzantine Monuments: ed. H. Speier, vol. 2, Die Stddtischen Sammlungen. The Archaeological and Literary Evidence," Interna- Kapitolinische Museen und Museo Barracco [Tiibingen tional Journal of the Classical Tradition 3 (1997) 395- 1966] 69-70, no. 1219). Altar: Rome, Capitoline Muse- 423. I thank Marie-Therese Stegeman-Zenner for refer- ums, 1958, an early fourth-century inscription over an ring me to the latter publication. erased first-century inscription (Helbig, 226-28, no. 1421). 6 Grave stelai: Blanck, 103-4. Ossuary: Seattle Art Mu- seum, 44.15, a second-century inscription (D M L 7 Recarved anta capital: Princeton University Art Mu- SALLVSTIO PRO/CESSO P.P.B.M.) over an erased first- seum, 53-25 (C. M. Antonaccio, "Style, Reuse, and Con- century inscription. Honorific inscription: Rome, text in a Roman Portrait at Princeton," Archdologischer Capitoline Museums, the name of Constantine over the Anzeiger [1992] 441-52, dating the portrait ca. A.D. 50- erased name of Diocletian (W. Helbig, Fuhrer durch die 75). Bearded priest: art market, 1960s (Blanck, 53-54, offentlichen Sammlungen klassischer Altertuimerin Rom, no. A30). SPOLIA.DAMNATIO AND RENOVATIOMEMORIAE 119 Fig. 3. Head of Constantine,Rome, Musei Capitolini, Fig. 4. Arch of Constantine,Adventus of Trajanl Palazzodei Conservatori(photo Deutsches Constantine,detail (photo Deutsches ArchaologischesInstitut, neg. no. 59.1720). ArchaologischesInstitut, neg. no. 86.368). are considered paradigmsof spolia, as they have been since the sixteenth century,but the term is never applied to the colossal head of Constantinein the courtyardof the Palazzo dei Conservatori(figs. 3, 13), which has long been suspected of recarvingand has recentlybeen declareda recut head of Hadrian.8We could easilyproduce a rationalefor such distinctions, but that would beg the questionof their historicalvalidity. We cannot take it for grantedthat our own tacit differentiationbetween spolia and other cases of reuse correspondsto any cat- egories that were or would have been recognizedin ancientRome. Historically,the designationspolia belongs to the sixteenthcentury, when-lacking a pre- existing term for them-the artist-antiquarianswho were discoveringreused antiquitiesbor- rowed the word from the semanticfield of war.9That the Romansand Italiansof the Middle Ages did not leave any other word to apply to these objects suggests that "reused marble artifacts"was an indirect concept in those cultures,rather like the products of recycling (as opposed to the process or its matter,recyclables) in English. Without a proper name they would not figure as a principal subject of discourse. In the Renaissance,by contrast, they 8 C. Evers, "Remarques sur l'iconographie de Constantin. Konstantins des Grossen," Von Angesicht zu Angesicht. A propos du remploi de portraits des 'Bons Empereurs,"' Portrdtstudien. Michael Stettler zum 70. Geburtstag, ed. Melanges de l'Tcole Franfaise de Rome. Antiquite, 103.2 F Deuchler, M. Flury-Lemberg, and K. Otavsky (Bern (1991) 794-99. According to another analysis, the origi- 1983) 55-57. nal portrait was of Maxentius: H. Jucker, "Von der Angemessenheit des Stils und einigen Bildnissen 9 Alchermes, 167-68. 120 DALE KINNEY were constitutedas a denoted subset of the newly elevatedcategory of antiquities,and it is as such that they have been carriedon into art history.The term spolia, in other words, is not only anachronisticwith
Recommended publications
  • Spolia's Implications in the Early Christian Church

    Spolia's Implications in the Early Christian Church

    BEYOND REUSE: SPOLIA’S IMPLICATIONS IN THE EARLY CHRISTIAN CHURCH by Larissa Grzesiak M.A., The University of British Columba, 2009 B.A. Hons., McMaster University, 2007 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in The Faculty of Graduate Studies (Art History) THE UNVERSIT Y OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) April 2011 © Larissa Grzesiak, 2011 Abstract When Vasari used the term spoglie to denote marbles taken from pagan monuments for Rome’s Christian churches, he related the Christians to barbarians, but noted their good taste in exotic, foreign marbles.1 Interest in spolia and colourful heterogeneity reflects a new aesthetic interest in variation that emerged in Late Antiquity, but a lack of contemporary sources make it difficult to discuss the motives behind spolia. Some scholars have attributed its use to practicality, stating that it was more expedient and economical, but this study aims to demonstrate that just as Scripture became more powerful through multiple layers of meaning, so too could spolia be understood as having many connotations for the viewer. I will focus on two major areas in which spolia could communicate meaning within the context of the Church: power dynamics, and teachings. I will first explore the clear ecumenical hierarchy and discourses of power that spolia delineated through its careful arrangement within the church, before turning to ideological implications for the Christian viewer. Focusing on the Lateran and St. Peter’s, this study examines the religious messages that can be found within the spoliated columns of early Christian churches. By examining biblical literature and patristic works, I will argue that these vast coloured columns communicated ideas surrounding Christian doctrine.
  • The Little Metropolis at Athens 15

    The Little Metropolis at Athens 15

    Bucknell University Bucknell Digital Commons Honors Theses Student Theses 2011 The Littleetr M opolis: Religion, Politics, & Spolia Paul Brazinski Bucknell University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.bucknell.edu/honors_theses Part of the Classics Commons Recommended Citation Brazinski, Paul, "The Little eM tropolis: Religion, Politics, & Spolia" (2011). Honors Theses. 12. https://digitalcommons.bucknell.edu/honors_theses/12 This Honors Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Student Theses at Bucknell Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of Bucknell Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Paul A. Brazinski iv Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge and thank Professor Larson for her patience and thoughtful insight throughout the writing process. She was a tremendous help in editing as well, however, all errors are mine alone. This endeavor could not have been done without you. I would also like to thank Professor Sanders for showing me the fruitful possibilities in the field of Frankish archaeology. I wish to thank Professor Daly for lighting the initial spark for my classical and byzantine interests as well as serving as my archaeological role model. Lastly, I would also like to thank Professor Ulmer, Professor Jones, and all the other Professors who have influenced me and made my stay at Bucknell University one that I will never forget. This thesis is dedicated to my Mom, Dad, Brian, Mark, and yes, even Andrea. Paul A. Brazinski v Table of Contents Abstract viii Introduction 1 History 3 Byzantine Architecture 4 The Little Metropolis at Athens 15 Merbaka 24 Agioi Theodoroi 27 Hagiography: The Saints Theodores 29 Iconography & Cultural Perspectives 35 Conclusions 57 Work Cited 60 Appendix & Figures 65 Paul A.
  • PDF Hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen

    PDF Hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen

    PDF hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen The following full text is a publisher's version. For additional information about this publication click this link. http://hdl.handle.net/2066/197438 Please be advised that this information was generated on 2019-09-09 and may be subject to change. Studies ANCIENT HISTORY “THE USURPING PRINCEPS”: MAXENTIUS’ IMAGE AND ITS CONSTANTINIAN LEGACY Abstract: This article deals with self-representation of Maxentius, who ruled over Italy and North Africa between 306 and 312. It focuses on the imagery and language that was distributed through coins and portraits during Maxentius’ reign, as well as their reception under Constantine immediately after the Battle of the Milvian Bridge (312). It argues that Maxentius revitalized the tradition of a princeps at Rome in order to play upon sentiments of neglect felt at Rome and the time. In coinage, this was most explicitly done through the unprecedented use of the princeps title on the obverse, which initially may Sven Betjes have caused a misunderstanding in the more distant parts of the Maxentian Institute for Historical, Literary and Cultural Studies, realm. The idea of the princeps was captivated in portraiture through visual Radboud University similarities with revered emperors, especially with Trajan, and through [email protected] insertion of Maxentius’ portraits in traditional togate capite velato. When Constantine defeated Maxentius in 312, he took over some of the imagery Sam Heijnen and language that had been employed by his deceased adversary. Constantine, Institute for Historical, Literary and Cultural Studies, too, presented himself as a princeps.
  • Architectural Spolia and Urban Transformation in Rome from the Fourth to the Thirteenth Century

    Architectural Spolia and Urban Transformation in Rome from the Fourth to the Thirteenth Century

    Patrizio Pensabene Architectural Spolia and Urban Transformation in Rome from the Fourth to the Thirteenth Century Summary This paper is a historical outline of the practice of reuse in Rome between the th and th century AD. It comments on the relevance of the Arch of Constantine and the Basil- ica Lateranensis in creating a tradition of meanings and ways of the reuse. Moreover, the paper focuses on the government’s attitude towards the preservation of ancient edifices in the monumental center of Rome in the first half of the th century AD, although it has been established that the reuse of public edifices only became a normal practice starting in th century Rome. Between the th and th century the city was transformed into set- tlements connected to the principal groups of ruins. Then, with the Carolingian Age, the city achieved a new unity and several new, large-scale churches were created. These con- struction projects required systematic spoliation of existing marble. The city enlarged even more rapidly in the Romanesque period with the construction of a large basilica for which marble had to be sought in the periphery of the ancient city. At that time there existed a highly developed organization for spoliating and reworking ancient marble: the Cos- matesque Workshop. Keywords: Re-use; Rome; Arch of Constantine; Basilica Lateranensis; urban transforma- tion. Dieser Artikel bietet eine Übersicht über den Einsatz von Spolien in Rom zwischen dem . und dem . Jahrhundert n. Chr. Er zeigt auf, wie mit dem Konstantinsbogen und der Ba- silica Lateranensis eine Tradition von Bedeutungsbezügen und Strategien der Spolienver- wendung begründet wurde.
  • Calendar of Roman Events

    Calendar of Roman Events

    Introduction Steve Worboys and I began this calendar in 1980 or 1981 when we discovered that the exact dates of many events survive from Roman antiquity, the most famous being the ides of March murder of Caesar. Flipping through a few books on Roman history revealed a handful of dates, and we believed that to fill every day of the year would certainly be impossible. From 1981 until 1989 I kept the calendar, adding dates as I ran across them. In 1989 I typed the list into the computer and we began again to plunder books and journals for dates, this time recording sources. Since then I have worked and reworked the Calendar, revising old entries and adding many, many more. The Roman Calendar The calendar was reformed twice, once by Caesar in 46 BC and later by Augustus in 8 BC. Each of these reforms is described in A. K. Michels’ book The Calendar of the Roman Republic. In an ordinary pre-Julian year, the number of days in each month was as follows: 29 January 31 May 29 September 28 February 29 June 31 October 31 March 31 Quintilis (July) 29 November 29 April 29 Sextilis (August) 29 December. The Romans did not number the days of the months consecutively. They reckoned backwards from three fixed points: The kalends, the nones, and the ides. The kalends is the first day of the month. For months with 31 days the nones fall on the 7th and the ides the 15th. For other months the nones fall on the 5th and the ides on the 13th.
  • Accommodating Political Change Under the Tetrarchy (293–306)

    Accommodating Political Change Under the Tetrarchy (293–306)

    PDF hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen The following full text is a publisher's version. For additional information about this publication click this link. http://hdl.handle.net/2066/213252 Please be advised that this information was generated on 2021-10-05 and may be subject to change. Klio 2019; 101(2): 610–639 Olivier Hekster – Sven Betjes – Sam Heijnen – Ketty Iannantuono – Dennis Jussen – Erika Manders – Daniel Syrbe* Accommodating Political Change under the Tetrarchy (293–306) https://doi.org/10.1515/klio-2019-0042 Summary: This article seeks to address the question how the Tetrarchic system of four rulers could be presented as legitimate in a society that had never seen this political constellation before. What were the different modes of presenting Tetrar- chic rule and how did they help in making the new system acceptable? The article argues that new power structures needed to be formulated in familiar terms, not only for the rulers to legitimate their position, but also for the ruled to understand such new systems. As a result, imperial messages during the Tetrarchic period were strongly influenced by traditional modes of representation from earlier pe- riods. Traditions which were inherent in specific media and locations were deter- mining factors for the way in which a new political system could be presented. The result was a much less coherent ideological Tetrarchic message than is often assumed. The image of group identity was regularly lost in a more complex and messy mode of formulating power. The new and innovative aspects of a collegiate rule by four emperors was less important than linking the power of those rulers to what was traditionally expected of the portrayal of Roman emperorship.
  • Uvic Thesis Template

    Uvic Thesis Template

    The Transformation of Administrative Towns in Roman Britain by Lara Bishop BA, Saint Mary‟s University, 1997 MA, University of Wales Cardiff, 2001 A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF ARTS in the Department of Greek and Roman Studies Lara Bishop, 2011 University of Victoria All rights reserved. This thesis may not be reproduced in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means, without the permission of the author. ii Supervisory Committee The Transformation of Administrative Towns in Roman Britain by Lara Bishop BA, Saint Mary‟s University, 1997 MA, University of Wales Cardiff, 2001 Supervisory Committee Dr. Gregory D. Rowe, (Department of Greek and Roman Studies) Supervisor Dr. J. Geoffrey Kron, (Department of Greek and Roman Studies) Departmental Member iii Abstract Supervisory Committee Dr. Gregory D. Rowe, (Department of Greek and Roman Studies) Supervisor Dr. J. Geoffrey Kron, (Department of Greek and Roman Studies) Departmental Member The purpose of this thesis is to determine whether the Roman administrative towns of Britain continued in their original Romanized form as seen in the second century AD, or were altered in their appearance and function in the fourth and fifth century, with a visible reduction in their urbanization and Romanization. It will be argued that British town life did change significantly. Major components of urbanization were disrupted with the public buildings disused or altered for other purposes, and the reduction or cessation of public services. A reduction in the population of the towns can be perceived in the eventual disuse of the extramural cemeteries and abandonment of substantial areas of settlement or possibly entire towns.
  • Saint Sophia Museum Project 2009: the Collection of Byzantine Marble Slabs in the Ayasofya Müzesi, Istanbul

    Saint Sophia Museum Project 2009: the Collection of Byzantine Marble Slabs in the Ayasofya Müzesi, Istanbul

    SAINT SOPHIA MUSEUM PROJECT 2009: THE COLLECTION OF BYZANTINE MARBLE SLABS IN THE AYASOFYA MÜZESİ, İSTANBUL Alessandra GUIGLIA1 Claudia BARSANTI Roberta FLAMINIO The project of a Corpus of the Byzantine sculptures in the Ayasofya Müzesi at İstanbul started in 2005 and has been carried on through the following years by the universities of Rome Sapienza, Rome Tor Vergata, and, since 2007, Bologna2. It is a pleasure to thank here the Ministry of Culture and Tourism of the Republic of Turkey for giving us permission to work in the Museum; thanks are also due to the Ayasofya Müzesi authorities. Research work for the year 20093 focused on a group of marble slabs that, although few in number, display noteworthy decorative and technical characteristics, as has already been observed about the refined Middle-Byzantine slabs that are now preserved in Saint Irene and which we presented at the Kocaeli Symposium4. Among the sculptures in Saint Irene figures a very interesting, but damaged and incomplete Early-Byzantine slab, inv. 388, which was briefly published by Ayten Erder in 19655 (Fig. 1). Of unknown provenance, it shows a quite unusual composition 1 Prof. Dr. Alessandra GUIGLIA, Sapienza Università di Roma, Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia, Dipartimento di Storia dell’Arte, Piazzale Aldo Moro 5, 00185 Roma/ITALY; e-mail: [email protected] Doç. Dr. Claudia BARSANTI, Università di Roma “Tor Vergata”, Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia, Dipartimento di Beni Culturali, Musica e Spettacolo, via Colombia, 00133 Roma/ITALY; e-mail: [email protected] Dr. Roberta FLAMINIO, Università di Roma “Tor Vergata”, Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia, Dipartimento di Beni Culturali, Musica e Spettacolo, via Colombia, 00133 Roma/ITALY; e-mail: robfl[email protected] 2 The research project, which in the years 2006-2008 has been already financed by the Ministry of Education, University and Research (project PRIN, national coordinator Prof.
  • A New Tetrarchic Relief from Nicomedia: Embracing Emperors Tuna Şare Ağtürk Open Access on AJA Online

    A New Tetrarchic Relief from Nicomedia: Embracing Emperors Tuna Şare Ağtürk Open Access on AJA Online

    article A New Tetrarchic Relief from Nicomedia: Embracing Emperors tuna Şare ağtürk Open Access on AJA Online Ancient Nicomedia, the most important capital of the eastern Roman empire during the Tetrarchy, now lies below the modern industrial city of İzmit. The first systematic archaeological research on Diocletian’s capital, supported with a grant from The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK), examines a series of monu- mental reliefs and statues from a terraced imperial cult complex, found in the Çukurbağ district at the heart of modern İzmit. Excavations have brought to light more than 30 re- lief panels (average ht. 1.0 m x wdth. 1.5 m), the only surviving examples of Late Roman state reliefs that have extensive paint preserved on them. The panels illuminate multiple aspects of the art of the period, including the brightly colored costumes and the new and distinctive self-representation of the tetrarchic emperors and their administration. In this article, one of these relief panels, with a representation of two emperors embracing, is discussed as the precursor to the well-known porphyry Tetrarchs from Venice and the Vatican. It is argued that the relief panel is part of a larger adventus scene that shows the meeting of the two diarchs, Diocletian and Maximian, and thus dates from slightly before the onset of Tetrarchy in 293 C.E.1 introduction Scenes of nearly identical coemperors and their Caesars embracing—perhaps the most emblematic motif in tetrarchic art—are well known from the por- phyry examples in Venice and the Vatican (figs. 1, 2).2 This motif is often seen as an early example of the rejection of the classical tradition in favor of the increasingly abstracted, symbolic, and rigid representations that would 1 This article stems from the Çukurbağ Archaeological Project, a large ongoing proj- ect conducted with the permission of the Kocaeli Museum and the Turkish Ministry of Culture and supported by The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) (Project 115K242).
  • A Study on the Building Techniques and Materials in the Late Antique and Byzantine Fortifications in Anatolia: Ancyra and Nicaea

    A Study on the Building Techniques and Materials in the Late Antique and Byzantine Fortifications in Anatolia: Ancyra and Nicaea

    A STUDY ON THE BUILDING TECHNIQUES AND MATERIALS IN THE LATE ANTIQUE AND BYZANTINE FORTIFICATIONS IN ANATOLIA: ANCYRA AND NICAEA A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY MERCAN YAVUZATMACA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CONSERVATION OF CULTURAL HERITAGE IN ARCHITECTURE DECEMBER 2016 Approval of the thesis: A STUDY ON THE BUILDING TECHNIQUES AND MATERIALS IN THE LATE ANTIQUE AND BYZANTINE FORTIFICATIONS IN ANATOLIA: ANCYRA AND NICAEA submitted by MERCAN YAVUZATMACA in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Conservation of Cultural Heritage in Architecture Department, Middle East Technical University by, Prof. Dr. Gülbin Dural Ünver Dean, Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences ____________________ Prof. Dr. Elvan Altan Head of Department, Architecture _____________________ Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ufuk Serin Supervisor, Architecture Dept., METU _____________________ Examining Committee Members: Prof. Dr. Suna Güven Architecture Department, METU ______________________ Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ufuk Serin Architecture Department, METU ______________________ Prof. Dr. Ayşıl Tükel Yavuz Architecture Department, METU. ______________________ Assoc. Prof. Dr. Namık Erkal Architecture Department, TED Uni. ______________________ Assist. Prof. Dr. Çiğdem Atakuman Settlement Archeology Dept., METU ______________________ Date: 02.12.2016 I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name: Mercan YAVUZATMACA Signature : iv ABSTRACT A STUDY ON THE BUILDING TECHNIQUES AND MATERIALS IN THE LATE ANTIQUE AND BYZANTINE FORTIFICATIONS IN ANATOLIA: ANCYRA AND NICAEA Yavuzatmaca, Mercan M.Sc.
  • Roman Imperial Triumphal Arches

    Roman Imperial Triumphal Arches

    Roman Imperial Triumphal Arches SARAH MIDFORD which you could have seen were the cattle of the Volcinians, the flocks of the Sabines, the wagons of the Gauls, the broken arms of the Samnites’ riumphal arches were permanent monuments (Florus, 1.13.26). After the victory over Pyrrhus, constructed to commemorate an ephemeral triumphal processions are said to have contained TRoman triumphal procession. Arches were ‘Molossians, Thessalonians, Macedonians, erected in Rome during the republican period, Bruttians, Apulians and Lucanians… statues of although because they were predominately gold and charming Tarentine painted panels’ made from wood, none have survived. During (Florus, 1.13.27). As time went on and Rome the imperial period arches were constructed conquered more lands, spoils of war including from more durable materials including concrete arms, money, precious metals and jewels, and marble. The Roman triumphal arches still statuary and paintings, trees, people, and kings standing today were constructed between the were brought to Rome. Triumphal processions first and fourth centuries CE. Each one conveys were expressions of Roman military prowess an imperialistic sentiment, although, the reason and glory, and the more glorious the spoils the for their construction was not consistently more powerful and glorious Rome appeared military victory, as one might presume. to be. This projection of power and glory was extended to the triumphing general (the The location, sculptural program and triumphator) architectural execution of each
  • Masons, Materials, and Machinery: Logistical Challenges in Roman

    Masons, Materials, and Machinery: Logistical Challenges in Roman

    Masons, Materials, and Machinery: Logistical Challenges in Roman Building Brian Sahotsky The Augustan-era poet Tibullus records an episode in the life of a Republican merchant, “His fancy turns to foreign marbles, and through the trembling city his column is carried by one thousand sturdy pairs of oxen.”1 By sheathing Rome in marble during the early 1st c. A.D. Augustus essentially prefigured three centuries of colossal stone construction in the capital.2 Subsequent emperors favored massive monolithic columns, metaphorically equating their size and distinctiveness with the might and reach of the empire. These exotic marbles, pried from quarries in peripheral locales like Egypt and Anatolia, demonstrated that Rome could bring wealth from any of its territories to showcase in the capital. Although these marble monoliths were a symbol for the supremacy of Rome, the real power was displayed in their erection.3 Key imperial construction projects developed into major spectacles, and the convoy of marble columns and cartloads of building materials to the building site shook the ground and commanded attention. One such case study from the Tetrarchic period is the building of the great Basilica of Maxentius at the southern end of the Roman Forum.4 In addition to its vast quantity of brick and concrete, the plans for the basilica specified eight Proconnesian marble columns that weighed in excess of 90 tons. These columns contained the perfect means to put on a dramatic show of Roman engineering and organizational expertise. The resulting parade of stone and brick to the Forum glorified the ambitious building program of the Emperor, and gave the people of Rome a spectacle that had been absent in the capital for nearly a hundred years.5 1 Tibullus, Elegiae, 2.3.43-44.