The Building of Verse: Descriptions of Architectural Structures in Roman Poetry

The Building of Verse: Descriptions of Architectural Structures in Roman Poetry Elizabeth Jane Crofton-Sleigh A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy University of Washington 2014 Reading Committee: Catherine Connors, Chair Alain Gowing Kathryn Topper Program Authorized to Offer Degree: Classics © Copyright 2014 Elizabeth Jane Crofton-Sleigh University of Washington Abstract The Building of Verse: Descriptions of Architectural Structures in Roman Poetry Elizabeth Jane Crofton-Sleigh Chair of Supervisory Committee: Professor Catherine Connors Classics The Building of Verse: Descriptions of Architectural Structures in Roman Poetry examines depictions of architecture in the literature of the Roman poets Virgil, Ovid, Horace, Propertius, Statius, and Martial. These poets, whose careers span the most significant building programs of ancient Rome, from the Age of Augustus through the Flavian period (ca. 31 BC – AD 96), often build ekphrases, or extended literary descriptions, around residences, temples, and other structures within their poetry. Besides the poetic evidence, I look at Vitruvius’ well-known architectural treatise, also written during the building-rich Augustan period, to explore how the poets share in the description of architectural elements and building practices found in his contemporaneous work. I argue that the depictions of architectural structures in these poets are never meant to function solely as settings but rather are intentionally included to more fully develop and vivify the poem’s vocabulary, imagery, and overall narrative and/or purpose. The first chapter highlights the poetic treatment of caverns and grottoes. It establishes that the poets use a fully developed architectural vocabulary to describe the natural dwellings of monsters and divine beings, as well as the related ideas that these poetically created natural habitats reflect their owners and can even refer to real structures in the Roman world. The second chapter treats both encomiastic and critical depictions of fully developed residences, which serve to identify their owners/inhabitants not only in terms of their aesthetic preferences but also with respect to their social status and their lifestyle. The third chapter turns to temples, hybrid between private (divine) residence and public structure. The poets depict temples in ways that are reflective not of the god or religious ceremony, but rather of how they themselves (i.e., their speakers/narrators) or their characters relate personally and uniquely to the structure, whether they construct or simply view the temple. The fourth chapter focuses on public structures that were used by the people for reasons other than religious worship, such as the curia and baths. It reveals a shift in the nature of poetic architectural descriptions over time, from the late first century B.C.E. writing of Virgil, who uses contemporary architectural terminology to enliven traditional epic structures, to the mid-late first century C.E. poets Statius and Martial, who break generic boundaries in establishing new kinds of poetry to celebrate new, fully Roman architectural structures such as the imperial thermae. Chapter Five serves as a conclusion to the project, considering the formation of cities and their development. Dedication To my mother, who taught me that true strength comes from within. Acknowledgments I have many people to thank for their guidance and support in the completion of this dissertation. I would first like to thank Catherine Connors, my dissertation advisor, who has helped in countless ways to bring this project to fruition. Always there when I needed, she also knew when to give me freedom to explore my ideas. I would like to thank Alain Gowing and Kathryn Topper for providing illuminating and insightful comments, which have greatly enhanced the project, as well as their tireless support and enthusiasm. The entire Classics faculty at the University of Washington has been instrumental in my reaching this stage; my endless gratitude will never repay the kindness, generosity, and energy each and every member has offered me throughout my career here. The timely completion of this project would not have been possible without the fellowships sponsored by the generosity of Meg and Jim Greenfield, while the inception of the project would never have taken place without the support of the Nesholms, who funded my first, most unforgettable trip to Rome. The personal insight I gained in seeing and experiencing firsthand the eternal city that is Rome only intensified my love for the Classics and what I do. Thank you also to the DeLacy family, whose endowment provided me travel funds so that I could present some of this research and launch my career. At the University of Washington I have met a number of truly wonderful fellow graduate students whom I am proud to call my colleagues and friends. From in-class discussions to games on the soccer field to dinner dialogues, I have learned so much from them all and appreciate their collegiality and kindness. I would especially like to thank Melissa, Alex, Brandon, and Bridget, who have been there for me in my ups and downs and never hesitated to help, even when I could not ask for it. I must also thank my family, who have cheered me on and guided me from the beginning. My mom, who has been my champion from day one, and my dad, who constantly encourages me to explore and learn more, I love you both. To my stepdad and stepmom for their continuous support, inspiration, and love, thank you from the bottom of my heart. But most importantly, to my one and only, George, my stronghold in many moments of anxiety during this project: I will always love you and will forever be grateful for your understanding and support, motivating me to achieve my very best. Last but not least, I must thank Sander Goldberg, who gave me a very simple answer to the question I had been debating in my own mind for months: If I am interested in both literature and architecture, in which direction should I take my dissertation? “Why not both?” Table of Contents Introduction 1 Chapter 1: Caverns and Grottoes 16 Chapter 2: The Homes of Gods and Men 53 Chapter 3: Temples 135 Chapter 4: Public Structures 184 Chapter 5: City Planning 226 Works Cited 258 1 INTRODUCTION As the cab driver steered me towards my destination of the Campo di Fiori, suddenly I saw it—my heart skipped a beat, my stomach knotted, and I smiled. There it was, gleaming in the late afternoon sun, the Theater of Marcellus, a monument I had contemplated for months, anticipating the time I would finally see it in person. I had always admired its three-ordered, travertine façade, yet nothing prepared me for the sense of personal attachment I felt to the structure at that very moment in the taxi. It represented my years of study in Classics and in classical architecture and the culmination of that period in my first trip to Rome. If I could feel such a strong connection to a building constructed thousands of years earlier, I wondered how those in antiquity perceived and responded to the buildings. In this dissertation I examine the work of six poets, representative witnesses to the dramatic physical changes Rome underwent in the first centuries BCE and CE, turning from a city of brick into a city of marble. Virgil, Horace, Propertius, Ovid, Martial, and Statius all wrote during the most significant building projects Rome had seen, from the Augustan through the Flavian period, and each poet features extended depictions (ekphrases) of buildings in their work. My project analyzes these depictions not simply to understand the architecture of Roman buildings and what they were like, but rather to interpret more broadly the literary texts. I argue that the depictions of architectural structures in these authors are never meant to function solely as settings but rather are intentionally included to more fully develop the poem’s vocabulary, imagery, and overall narrative and/or purpose. As the poet creates his poem, he creates the building in his own mind and in the mind of the reader, who imagines what the structure must have looked like while reading the poem. The reader, whether ancient or modern, is given the same invitation to “view” the building and to 2 appreciate and admire its interesting features. This “building” of buildings in poetry becomes more fascinating when it is provided a Roman context. Just as poetry consists of a physical text, the building is what creates the physical “text” of any city, and particularly the city of Rome.1 Buildings become monuments and they comprise a large part of the identity and memory of Rome.2 Along with ideas of identity, memory, and space, I consider the poet’s treatment of buildings (and his poetry) in other ways. The location of the building, whether inside or outside of Rome, can play a role in how the poet chooses to relate and interpret the building. All of the poets discussed below examine the relationship of the structure to its respective owner; every building is in some way strikingly reflective of its builder and/or inhabitant. The architectural features each poet chooses to emphasize, including building materials, size, proportion, exposure, and artistic themes, among others, are not simply vocabulary terms, but in fact demonstrate how a lay Roman reader (i.e., neither an architect nor professional builder) in antiquity would have conceived of and related to structures: their creation, their function, and their meaning. The poets, attempting to appeal to a broad audience of all occupations, typically choose captivating, even awe-inducing, structures and structural features to captivate their readers. 1 Cf. Kraus 1994, who likens the creation of buildings to the creation of literature in Livy.

Load more