日本建築学会計画系論文集 第82巻 第734号，1109-1114， 2017年4月 【カテゴリーⅠ】 J. Archit. Plann., AIJ, Vol. 82 No. 734, 1109-1114, Apr., 2017 DOI http://doi.org/10.3130/aija.82.1109 THE RESTORATION OF THE ARCH OF TITUS THE RESTORATIONIN THE OF THE NINETEENTH ARCH OF TITUS CENTURY: IN THE NINETEENTH The intention of Giuseppe Valadier regardingCENTURY: distinctions between old and new architectural materials The intervention of Giuseppe Valadier19 世紀のティトゥスの凱旋門の修復 regarding distinctions between old and new architectural materials 工法「新旧の建材の識別」に関するジュゼッペ・ヴァラディエの意図19 ୡ⣖ࡢࢸ࢕ࢺࢗࢫࡢถ᪕㛛ࡢಟ᚟ ᕤἲࠕ᪂ᪧࡢᘓᮦࡢ㆑ูࠖ࡟㛵ࡍࡿࢪࣗࢮࢵ࣭ࣦ࣌࢓ࣛࢹ࢕࢚ࡢពᅗ Go OHBA ＊ 大場 豪 ኱ሙ ㇦* Go OHBA The Arch of Titus, restored in the first half of nineteenth century, is a restoration model in terms of certain distinctions between old and new architectural materials. To comprehend the intervention method, this study examined sources on the restoration and compared with a case study, the restoration of the eastern outer wall of the Colosseum. As a result, this study pointed that the Roman architect Giuseppe Valadier sought architectural unity that denoted for the harmony of the two different types of materials. Keywords: The Arch of Titus, restoration, Giuseppe Valadier, The Colosseum ࢸ࢕ࢺࢗࢫࡢถ᪕㛛㸪ಟ᚟㸪ࢪࣗࢮࢵ࣭ࣦ࣌࢓ࣛࢹ࢕࢚, ࢥࣟࢵࢭ࢜ Recognize Introduction proposal was based on the restoration of the Arch of Titus, as he himself This study discusses the restoration of the Arch of Titus from 1818 to mentioned in Mouseion, the journal of conference’s host organization the 1823 in Rome. The intervention made the ancient monument valuable for International Museum Office4). This episode proved that people still the interplay between old and new architectural materials, a concept that is exemplified the intervention one hundred years after its implementation in taken in restoration projects abroad. On the one hand, the restoration was Italy, and the Athens Conference was a key event in global diffusion of a model for safeguarding historic monuments as the Finnish architect theories and ideals in architectural restoration. Jukka Jokilehto pointed out1). He characterized the restoration as an I have previously discussed restoration factors in a paper entitled “The intermediate measure of subsequent two contrast ideas; the sculptor Background of a Restoration of the Arch of Titus in the Roman Forum: Antonio Canova (1757-1822) opposed any attempts at reconstruction in Discussions of a Social Aspect and the Past Destruction” (2014). As parts order to preserve original members, the sculptor Albert Thorwaldsen of a project aimed at fortifying the Palatine Hill in the Middle Ages, the (1770-1844) agreed with reconstructing missing architectural parts2). On aristocratic Frangipane transformed the ancient arch into a gate with the other hand, I indicated that the restoration of the triumphal arch travertine blocks on its vault. Furthermore, during the regime of Napoléon influenced to outline global guidelines on architectural conservation Bonaparte (1769-1821) over the city from 1809 to 1814, the French codified in the first half of the nineteenth century. The minutes of the destroyed the Convent of the Santa Francesca Romana, which had international conference of experts for the protection and the conservation provided lateral support for arch’s thrust. Around the same time, the of artistic and historical monuments (the Athens Conference) revealed that minutes of the Commission for the Embellishment of Rome revealed, that European participants discussed the subject on the use of substitute architects of the Academy of San Luca, Giuseppe Valadier*1) (1762-1839, materials for Athenian Acropolis on October 25, 1931, and the Italian Photo1), Giuseppe Camporese*2) (1763-1822), and Raffaele Stern*3) architect Gustavo Giovannoni proposed differentiating the original (1774-1820), researched the conditions of Rome’s ancient monuments and Pentelic marbles and new stone materials. His proposal is seen in a part of named the Arch of Titus as their first choice for conservation5). Their the general conclusions reached by the conference; the sixth article on proposal to the Commission, reconstruction of the piers of the triumphal conservation techniques stated that, “the new materials used for this arch6), emphasized the need for lateral reinforcement. purpose [anastylosis] should in all cases be recognizable3).” Giovannoni’s Concerning distinctions between old and new materials, researchers are ＊ Technical Technical Staff, GraduateStaff, Graduate School School of Engineering, of Engineering, Yokohama Yokohama National National University,*ᶓ὾ᅜ❧኱Ꮫ Dr. Eng. ⌮ᕤᏛ⣔኱Ꮫ㝔➼ 横浜国立大学理工学系大学院等 技術職員・工博 ᢏ⾡⫋ဨ࣭ᕤ༤ University, Dr. Eng. ─ 1109 ─ Photo1 (left) Giuseppe Valadier (L’Archivio di Storico dell’Accademia Nazionale di San Luca) Photo2 (center) The restored image of the eastern facade of the Arch of Titus by Giuseppe Valadier (L’Archivio di Stato di Roma, Camerlengato Parte I, Titolo IV. Busta 40. Fiscicolo 106) Photo3 (center) The eastern facade of the Arch of Titus by Sebastian Serlio (Serlio, Sebastiano. 1540. Regole Generali di Architettura, di Sebastiano Serlio Bolognese sopra le Cinque Maniere de gli Edifici, cioè Thoscano, Dorico, Ionico, Corinthio, e Composito, con gli Essempi de l’Antiquita, che per la Maggior Parte Concordano con la Dottrina di Vitruuio, p. 105) over divided into two groups. In the first group, many of them7) refer to the decorations12). restoration report written by Valadier, which stated economic reasons led It is still uncertain who had outlined these four activities above. The him to simplify the decorations on new materials8). In the second group, restoration had two directors, Valadier and Stern. The former architect had other scholars present their own hypotheses such as aesthetic9) and taken over the leadership alone after Stern’s death in 1820, but there are historic10) reasons. This study, in contrary, attempts to explain Valadier’s no sources proving the fact. The leading doctrine13) was the proposal of intention based not only on sources housed in the National Archives in Alexandre Jean-Baptiste Guy de Gisors*4) (1762-1835), who stayed in Paris, the Library of the British School at Rome, the Historic Archive of Rome to investigate archeological ruins during the French regime. Based the National Academy of San Luca, the Library of Archaeology and of Art on his survey result, de Gisors proposed several times that the History, the Library of the Museum of Rome, and the State Archive of Commission of Embellishment in Rome should preserve the decaying Rome, but on a comparative study of the restoration of the eastern outer parts of the ancient monuments, and one of these monuments was the wall of the Colosseum, which was also seen distinctions between old and triumphal arch: new architectural materials. For example, the Arch of Titus must firstly be reinforced and all parts Restoration activities should be enclosed in a framework to dismantle and reassemble Valadier wrote about the restoration of the Arch of Titus in Narrazione voussoirs, which might otherwise easily fall, and which require the Artistica dell’Operato Finora nel Ristauro dell’Arco di Tito Letta most careful handling, on other inferior voussoirs replaced in their nell’Accademia Romana di Archeologia il 20 Decembre 1821, Roma original positions, after the restoration either in stone or in brick, of (1822). His report summarized the background and implimention of the which the major parts of the piers which the arch has lost, so that this interventions and included visual sources such as an image of the interesting monument presents its original form and initial triumphal arch after the restoration (Photo2). The State Archive of Rome proportions again14). has two types of his report (one printed, the other two handwritten by Valadier), the contents of which are almost the same. Valadier wrote that The proposal of de Gisors is both similar and different to the practical his colleague Stern initially planned to replace the fallen masses of stone restoration directed by Valadier. In both the proposal and the intervention, with screws11), but his first idea was not enough to stabilize the remaining the masses of stone were dismantled, each piece was replaced using structure. Instead of screws, the following activities were executed: appropriate supports, and the whole mass of the Arch of Titus was dismantlement of masses of stone, reassembly of each piece with reconstructed. The major difference is that Valadier paid particular opportune supports, reconstruction of the whole mass of the Arch, and c attention to ornamentations. The ancient Romans had erected triumphal cover the architectural blocks in travertine with decorations in the ancient arches to commemorate the glory of the Empire through decorations, so ─ 1110 ─ Photo4 (left) The eastern facade of the Arch of Titus by Luigi Rossini in 1832 (La Biblioteca di Archeologia e Storia dell’Arte, Roma XI. 10. II. 5) Photo5 (center)The monochrome photo of the eastern facade of the Arch of Titus by Lorenzo Suscipi circa 1860 (La Biblioteca del Museo di Roma, AF 1220) Photo6 (right) The entablature and composite capitals of the eastern facade of the Arch of Titus (Photo: Go Ohba) that ornamentation played fundamental role in such monuments. the difference in material through mezzotint and plain areas in his image According to his report, Valadier intended to restore the Arch of Titus of the eastern facade of the Roman arch after the intervention. He used prior to destruct by ancient barbarians15); thus, he aimed to recover both both drawing methods to differentiate the two parts; for example, the left missing structure and missing ornamentation. pier in Photo2 illustrates two columns, the left column is new but the Valadier referred to several sources to determine the original ancient right one is original. The difference between old and new materials is appearance of the Arch of Titus. As to the position of the columns, he may easily seen in the depiction by Luigi Rossini (1790-1857), who drew the have used the picture of the Roman arch drawn by Sebastian Serlio16) eastern facade of the triumphal arch in 1832, about a decade after the (1475-1554), which showed the eastern facade plain without specific restoration.