This is an essay giving a discussion of art history within two ancient architectural objects. The two art objects being discussed here are the Sanctuary of Fortuna and Pompeii Amphitheater. The paper gives a short description in the existing relationships of the two objects. The paper also compares and contrasts the two architectural designs. In such a comparison, the paper tackles all issues to do with the subject matter of the designs, the style of the designs, the technique used, the function and even the style. The paper will thus be able to give a keen description of the two architectural designs.
Any given pair of architectural designs, whether ancient or current, will definitely have similarities and differences in their styles, functions and art designs. Praeneste is known to have been chiefly famed due to the Fortuna Primigenia which was a great temple of that time (Leland, 1993). The temple was connected to an oracle known as the Praenestine Lots. The oracle is recorded to have been redeveloped immediately after 82 BC. This was achieved by designing spectacular series with terraces, porticos and exedras which were built on the four levels of the temple. It was on the hillside and was linked to classical monumental ramps and stairs. The building holding the temple consisted of a number of ancient architectural features that were greatly influenced by the Garden Architectural of Rome. Today, the present Vittoro Immanuel monument situated in Rome is known to have borrowed a lot from the complex at the Praeneste sanctuary. Having been a great example of urbanistic design, its inspiration for the design is believed not to lie in the Roman Republican, but in the monarchies of Hellenistic, on the eastern side of the Mediterranean. Praeneste is known to have offered a foretaste which gives a start to an Imperial Architectural Style to the next world.
On the other hand, one of the earliest stones at amphitheater is known to have been built in Pompeii somewhere in the 70s BC. It was oval shaped, and had tiered steep seats. Such seats were designed to from a circumference. Again, all the soil that had been excavated to come up with the arena design was banked in order to form the seating arena (Leland, 1993). Such a seating arrangement was stabilized on both the east and south by the walls covering the Pompeii town. The colonists and veterans used to have their seats in the podium, just near the arena. These colonists enjoyed social prestige and therefore had that place preserved for them. The other people and the visitors were supposed to climb up the stairway and sit at the upper chambers or terraces. This structure also had a given subterranean kind of structure beneath the main arena (Johnson, 2007). Having acquainted ourselves with these two ancient architectural designs, it would be necessary to look at their similarities and differences.
Comparing and Contrasting the Sanctuary of Fortuna and Pompeii Amphitheater
The amphitheater is known to have had its name derived from the fact that it had been composed of two main theaters, and such an amphitheater will usually be round in shape. Also, the theater, since it is supposed to be semicircular in shape, gave it the name of half the amphitheater (Johnson, 2007). It gives the details of the design of this architectural building. Looking at the building, it is important to note that it was a structure used for holding games and casinos, and also holding some important events within the city. Another thing about it is that all its external walls had been covered with big posters which praised the gladiators, and at the same time gave records of the expectations of the game outcomes. In terms of symbolisms, the Celadus Thracian has been described to be the great hero, and the heartthrob for the Pompeii girls (Geoffrey, 2001). Looking at the area which surrounded the amphitheater, it had been developed into eateries and taverns which had been used in the provision for pre and post events of the games. This provided necessary refreshments to the participants.
When it comes to the design and structure, the amphitheaters of Pompeii are very artistic, simple and are a representation of the ancient art in the construction of such buildings. In terms of size, the theater measured about 135 Meters by 104 Meters. The arena had been created as pit that had all the soil excavated to about 6 Meters below the level of the ground. The soil that had been excavated had been heaped up and formed the seating area (Nagle, 2006). Such a heap divided all the audience with a spectacular two meter balustrade. Such balustrade would not give enough protection to the ones seated at the front during the fights involving wild beats. This would therefore give enough details of some of the mediums used in the construction of this structure.
The Fortuna temple at Praeneste is one of the greatest architecturally designed temples from the ancient times. The temple had been connected to an oracle, known as the Praenestine Lots. The oracle was later redeveloped, immediately after 82 BC. The temple had been comprised of the great examples of artistic designs from the ancient world. There is a spectacular series of terraces, porticos and exedras that had been built on the four levels of the temple (Moffett, 2009). It was on the hillside and was linked to classical monumental ramps and stairs. The building holding this temple consisted of a number of features that were greatly influenced by the Garden Architectural of the Roman. This gave the temple a spectacular function, and the Roman Matrons would use it in worshiping the goddesses (Fagan, 2009).
Today, Vittoro Immanuels monument which is situated in Rome borrowed a lot from the complex at the Praeneste sanctuary. The medium used for this building were bricks and cement which was widely used during those days, and the ancient architectural techniques. In terms of symbolism, the structure depicts goddess Fortuna. This goddess was being referred to by the name Primigenia, or the First Bearer. Such a goddess was being represented with two suckling babes. There were also some other representations of the goddess as the present Christian Charity Representations. Such included Juno and Jupiter, and the goddess was usually worshipped by the Roman Matrons (William, 2009).
Having been attached to an oracle, the structure continued to see it being consulted as the Christianity times started to develop. Later, during the Constantine time and after that, during Theodosius time, the oracle practices and consultations were forbidden, and this led to the closure of the temple. There are a number of differences occurring between these two ancient structures, and especially in terms of their functions. But, looking at the designs, the two used ancient architectural structures definitely had some similarities. The issue of symbolism was also common with both structures (Moffett, 2009).
It is true that the present architectural and art designs are complete products borrowing much from the ancient world. This means that such ancient designs will act as prototypes for our present developments and advancements in terms of art and architecture. This way, the present world has been able to look back to history and see what necessary features, designs and techniques can be borrowed and used for the development of present structures (Moffett, 2009). Also, it is important to note that any comparison of two different objects from the ancient world, or even the present world, would definitely give us some similarities in their designs, functions and styles, while at the same time giving us outstanding differences such differences would occur in terms of the functions of the objects or designs, and also in their styles. For instance, the temples that were created in the Roman Empire had been borrowing from the ancient temples, and this would also bring about some changes here and there on how such temples were being used and managed (Brendan, 2005). Several historians have been thinking that most of the ancient structures had some symbolic functions behind their constructions, and there is some sense in it. Looking at the Fortuna, it is likely that it had been constructed as a dedication to goddess Portunus, the goddess who managed the ports and harbors. This is exactly what has been noted from these two objects of architecture.
Any given pair of architectural designs, whether ancient or current, will definitely have similarities and differences in their styles, functions and art designs. Praeneste is known to have been chiefly famed due to the Fortuna Primigenia which was a great temple of that time (Leland, 1993). The temple was connected to an oracle known as the Praenestine Lots. The oracle is recorded to have been redeveloped immediately after 82 BC. This was achieved by designing spectacular series with terraces, porticos and exedras which were built on the four levels of the temple. It was on the hillside and was linked to classical monumental ramps and stairs. The building holding the temple consisted of a number of ancient architectural features that were greatly influenced by the Garden Architectural of Rome. Today, the present Vittoro Immanuel monument situated in Rome is known to have borrowed a lot from the complex at the Praeneste sanctuary. Having been a great example of urbanistic design, its inspiration for the design is believed not to lie in the Roman Republican, but in the monarchies of Hellenistic, on the eastern side of the Mediterranean. Praeneste is known to have offered a foretaste which gives a start to an Imperial Architectural Style to the next world.
On the other hand, one of the earliest stones at amphitheater is known to have been built in Pompeii somewhere in the 70s BC. It was oval shaped, and had tiered steep seats. Such seats were designed to from a circumference. Again, all the soil that had been excavated to come up with the arena design was banked in order to form the seating arena (Leland, 1993). Such a seating arrangement was stabilized on both the east and south by the walls covering the Pompeii town. The colonists and veterans used to have their seats in the podium, just near the arena. These colonists enjoyed social prestige and therefore had that place preserved for them. The other people and the visitors were supposed to climb up the stairway and sit at the upper chambers or terraces. This structure also had a given subterranean kind of structure beneath the main arena (Johnson, 2007). Having acquainted ourselves with these two ancient architectural designs, it would be necessary to look at their similarities and differences.
Comparing and Contrasting the Sanctuary of Fortuna and Pompeii Amphitheater
The amphitheater is known to have had its name derived from the fact that it had been composed of two main theaters, and such an amphitheater will usually be round in shape. Also, the theater, since it is supposed to be semicircular in shape, gave it the name of half the amphitheater (Johnson, 2007). It gives the details of the design of this architectural building. Looking at the building, it is important to note that it was a structure used for holding games and casinos, and also holding some important events within the city. Another thing about it is that all its external walls had been covered with big posters which praised the gladiators, and at the same time gave records of the expectations of the game outcomes. In terms of symbolisms, the Celadus Thracian has been described to be the great hero, and the heartthrob for the Pompeii girls (Geoffrey, 2001). Looking at the area which surrounded the amphitheater, it had been developed into eateries and taverns which had been used in the provision for pre and post events of the games. This provided necessary refreshments to the participants.
When it comes to the design and structure, the amphitheaters of Pompeii are very artistic, simple and are a representation of the ancient art in the construction of such buildings. In terms of size, the theater measured about 135 Meters by 104 Meters. The arena had been created as pit that had all the soil excavated to about 6 Meters below the level of the ground. The soil that had been excavated had been heaped up and formed the seating area (Nagle, 2006). Such a heap divided all the audience with a spectacular two meter balustrade. Such balustrade would not give enough protection to the ones seated at the front during the fights involving wild beats. This would therefore give enough details of some of the mediums used in the construction of this structure.
The Fortuna temple at Praeneste is one of the greatest architecturally designed temples from the ancient times. The temple had been connected to an oracle, known as the Praenestine Lots. The oracle was later redeveloped, immediately after 82 BC. The temple had been comprised of the great examples of artistic designs from the ancient world. There is a spectacular series of terraces, porticos and exedras that had been built on the four levels of the temple (Moffett, 2009). It was on the hillside and was linked to classical monumental ramps and stairs. The building holding this temple consisted of a number of features that were greatly influenced by the Garden Architectural of the Roman. This gave the temple a spectacular function, and the Roman Matrons would use it in worshiping the goddesses (Fagan, 2009).
Today, Vittoro Immanuels monument which is situated in Rome borrowed a lot from the complex at the Praeneste sanctuary. The medium used for this building were bricks and cement which was widely used during those days, and the ancient architectural techniques. In terms of symbolism, the structure depicts goddess Fortuna. This goddess was being referred to by the name Primigenia, or the First Bearer. Such a goddess was being represented with two suckling babes. There were also some other representations of the goddess as the present Christian Charity Representations. Such included Juno and Jupiter, and the goddess was usually worshipped by the Roman Matrons (William, 2009).
Having been attached to an oracle, the structure continued to see it being consulted as the Christianity times started to develop. Later, during the Constantine time and after that, during Theodosius time, the oracle practices and consultations were forbidden, and this led to the closure of the temple. There are a number of differences occurring between these two ancient structures, and especially in terms of their functions. But, looking at the designs, the two used ancient architectural structures definitely had some similarities. The issue of symbolism was also common with both structures (Moffett, 2009).
It is true that the present architectural and art designs are complete products borrowing much from the ancient world. This means that such ancient designs will act as prototypes for our present developments and advancements in terms of art and architecture. This way, the present world has been able to look back to history and see what necessary features, designs and techniques can be borrowed and used for the development of present structures (Moffett, 2009). Also, it is important to note that any comparison of two different objects from the ancient world, or even the present world, would definitely give us some similarities in their designs, functions and styles, while at the same time giving us outstanding differences such differences would occur in terms of the functions of the objects or designs, and also in their styles. For instance, the temples that were created in the Roman Empire had been borrowing from the ancient temples, and this would also bring about some changes here and there on how such temples were being used and managed (Brendan, 2005). Several historians have been thinking that most of the ancient structures had some symbolic functions behind their constructions, and there is some sense in it. Looking at the Fortuna, it is likely that it had been constructed as a dedication to goddess Portunus, the goddess who managed the ports and harbors. This is exactly what has been noted from these two objects of architecture.
No comments:
Post a Comment