HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE

Greek and Roman Architecture

HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE 0|Page

 A SECTION OF THE PANTHEON

THE PARTHENON

1|Page
Abstract

This paper was done with the objective of diving into the history banks

of both Greek and Roman architecture in order to better understand

and also be able to explain the thinking behind the many wondrous

buildings constructed at that time. But the question still stands into

which is which. In order to differentiate and compare the 2 eras we

analysed starting from their history, then to their architectural

character and also included different structures . This was done by

referring into different resources such as websites books or articles to

give the best result. It is our deepest wish that by reviewing this

analysis you will be able to identify each styles through their overall

character including their shortcoming and are able to differentiate and

name the differences between the two.

2|Page
Introduction

Greek and Roman architecture are the epitome’s of what architecture is

or was. Their overall style, philosophy, construction method and their

awareness of the more natural elements can be seen as quite an

amazing achievement. They both have been able to accomplish an

architecture that transcends the concept of time by becoming relevant

throughout the ages. This isn’t something that should be taking lightly

as every architecture hopes to become an embodiment of a thinking or

a source of knowledge of a certain time when being referred to and still

live to tell in another era. They have been able to influence and change

or even start a whole movement due to their profound knowledge and

studies on arts.

3|Page
Contents
KEY WORDS...................................................................................................................................................5

GREEK ARCHITECTURE ..............................................................................................................................6

Origin..........................................................................................................................................................6
Influences ..................................................................................................................................................7
Architectural Characteristics .................................................................................................................8
Early development ...............................................................................................................................8
Elements................................................................................................................................................9
How Stone Temples Were Built .......................................................................................................10
Types of Buildings ..............................................................................................................................11
Domestic Architecture ..........................................................................................................................15
Critiques on Greek Architecture ..........................................................................................................17
Roman Architecture............................................................................................................................19
Roman Empire Begins ...........................................................................................................................19
Republican Period ..............................................................................................................................20
Imperial Period ...................................................................................................................................21
Architectural Characteristics ...............................................................................................................22
Building Materials ..............................................................................................................................22
Roman architectural revolution .......................................................................................................23
TYPES OF STRUCTURES ....................................................................................................................23
Critiques on Roman Architecture ........................................................................................................35
Comparison .................................................................................................................................................36
The Parthenon and the Pantheon ........................................................................................................36

4|Page
KEY WORDS

Dorian Greeks: Were one of the four major ethnic groups in Ancient
Greece
Acropolis: An ancient citadel located on a rocky outcrop above
the city of Athens
Zeus: Greek Deities
Dionysos: Greek Deities
Artemis: Greek Deities
Poseidon: Greek Deities
Mycenaean: The term applied to the art and culture of Greece from 1600 to 1100 B.C
Minoan: Civilization on the island of Crete whose earliest beginnings date 3500BC
Colonnades: Long sequence of columns joined by their entablature
Temenos: Temple enclosure or court in ancient Greece
Tholos: Circular building with a conical or vaulted roof
Timaeus: One of Plato’s Dialogue

Etruscan: Member of an ancient people of etruia

Triclinium: A couch extending three sides of a table by the Ancient Romans
Caldaria: A hot room in an Ancient Roman bath
Tepidaria: A warm room in an Ancient Roman bath
Frigidarium: A cold room in an ancient Roman bath

5|Page
 GREEK ARCHITECTURE

A ncient Greek architects strove for the precision and excellence of workmanship that
are the hallmarks of Greek art in general. The formulas they invented as early as the
sixth century B.C. have influenced the architecture for the past two millennia. Following the
demise of this style of thinking it inspired and started multiple movements that tried to re-
ignite the philosophy of this civilization. So it is safe to say that ancient Greek architecture
played a pivotal role in molding today's approach. Although all this holds true little is known
of how this style of architecture came into being.

Origin

This architecture came from the Greek-speaking people whose culture flourished on the
Greek mainland, the Peloponnese, the Aegean Islands, and in colonies in Anatolia and Italy
for a period from about 900 BC until the 1st century AD, with the earliest remaining
architectural works dating from around 600 BC.

The Greeks communicated spaces and shapes through an emphasis on proportionality, as

heavily illustrated by Greek mathematician Pythagoras. And by that, the style of Greek
buildings was extensively based on dimensions, scale, and their relationship to one another.
As for materials, the Greek possessed exquisite craftsmanship in stone, building
monumental structures and ornamenting them with refined marble artistry.

The mainland and islands of Greece are very rocky, with deeply indented coastline, and
rugged mountain ranges with few substantial forests. The most freely available building
material is stone. Limestone was readily available and easily worked. There is an abundance
of high quality white marble both on the mainland and islands, particularly Paros and Naxos.
This finely grained material was a major contributing factor to precision of detail, both
architectural and sculptural, that adorned ancient Greek architecture.

Historians divide ancient Greek civilization into two eras, the Hellenic period (from around
900 BC to the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC), and the Hellenistic period (323 BC to
30 AD). During the earlier Hellenic period, substantial works of architecture began to appear
around 600 BC. During the later (Hellenistic) period,

Greek culture spread as a result of Alexander's conquest of other lands, and later as a result
of the rise of the Roman Empire, which adopted much of Greek culture.

6|Page
The art history of the Hellenic era is generally subdivided into four periods: Protogeometric
(1100–900 BC), Geometric (900–700 BC), Archaic (700–500 BC) and the Classical (500–323
BC) with sculpture being further divided into
Severe Classical, High Classical and Late
Classical. The first signs of the particular
artistic character that defines ancient Greek
architecture are to be seen in the pottery of
the Dorian Greeks from the 10th century BC.
Already at this period it is created with a
sense of proportion, symmetry and balance
not apparent in similar pottery from Crete
and Mycenae. The decoration is precisely
geometric, and ordered neatly into zones on
defined areas of each vessel. These qualities
were to manifest themselves not only
through a millennium of Greek pottery
making, but also in the architecture that was to emerge in the 6th century. The major
development that occurred was in the growing use of the human figure as the major
decorative motif, and the increasing surety with which humanity, its mythology, activities
and passions were depicted.

Influences

The religion of ancient Greece was a form of nature worship that grew out of the beliefs of
earlier cultures. However, unlike earlier cultures, the man was no longer perceived as being
threatened by nature, but as its sublime product. The natural elements were personified as
gods of the complete human form, and very human behaviour.The ancient Greeks perceived
order in the universe, and in turn, applied order and reason to their creations. Their
humanist philosophy put mankind at the centre of things and promoted well-ordered
societies and the development of democracy. At the same time, the respect for human
intellect demanded a reason, and promoted a passion for enquiry, logic, challenge, and
problem-solving. The architecture of the ancient Greeks, and in particular, temple
architecture, responds to these challenges with a passion for beauty, and for order and
symmetry which is the product of a continual search for perfection, rather than a simple
application of a set of working rules.

They are rightly famous for their magnificent Doric and Ionic temples, and the example par
excellence is undoubtedly the Parthenon of Athens. Built in the mid-5th century BCE in
order to house the gigantic statue of Athena and to advertise to the world the glory of

7|Page
Athens, it still stands majestically on the city's acropolis. Other celebrated examples are the
massive Doric Temple of Zeus at Olympia (completed c. 460 BCE), the Temple of Artemis at
Ephesus (completed c. 430 BCE), which was considered one of the wonders of the ancient
world, and the evocative Temple of Poseidon at Sounion (444-440 BCE), perched on the
cliffs overlooking the Aegean. The latter is illustrative of the Greek desire that such public
buildings should not just fulfill their typical function of housing a statue of a Greek deity, and
not only should they be admired from close-up or from the inside, but also that they should
be admired from afar.

A great deal of effort was made to build temples in prominent positions and, using
sophisticated geometry, architects included optical 'tricks' such as thickening the lower
parts of columns, thickening corner columns, and having columns ever so slightly lean
inwards so that from a distance the building seemed perfectly straight and in harmony.
Many of these refinements are invisible to the naked eye, and even today only sophisticated
measuring devices can detect the minute differences in angles and dimensions. Such
refinements of architectural style indicate that Greek temples were, therefore, not only
functional structures but also that the building itself, as a whole, was symbolic and an
important element in the civic landscape.

Architectural Characteristics

Early development

There is a clear division between the architecture of the preceding Mycenaean culture and
Minoan cultures and that of the Ancient Greeks, the techniques and an understanding of
their style being lost when these civilizations fell. The Minoan architecture of Crete, was of
trabeated form like that of Ancient Greece. It employed wooden columns with capitals, but
the columns were of very different form to Doric columns, being narrow at the base and
splaying upward. The earliest forms of columns in Greece seem to have developed
independently. As with Minoan architecture, Ancient Greek domestic architecture centred
on open spaces or courtyards surrounded by colonnades. This form was adapted to the
construction of hypo-style halls within the larger temples.

8|Page
Elements

Base and Walls

The temple was built on a masonry base (crepidoma), which elevated it above the
surrounding ground. The base usually consists of three steps: the topmost step is the
"stylobate"; the two lower steps are the "stereobate". Like the Parthenon, most temples
have a three-step base, although the Temple of Zeus at Olympus, has two, while the Temple
of Apollo at Didyma has six. During the petrification process (650/600 BCE onwards),
temples were given masonry walls, consisting mostly of local stone rubble, sometimes
augmented by high quality ashlar masonry. Inside the temple, the inner sanctum
(cella/naos) was made of stone, as were the antechambers, if any.

Roof
All early temples had a flat thatched roof, supported by columns (hypostyle), but as soon as
walls were made from stone and could therefore support a heavier load, temples were
given a slightly sloping roof, covered with ceramic terracotta tiles. These roof tiles could be
up to three-feet long and weigh as much as 80 pounds.

Column and Lintel

Greek architects and building engineers knew about both the "arch" (see, for instance, The
Rhodes Footbridge, 4th century BCE) and the "vault" (corbel and barrel types), but they
made little use of either in their architectural construction. Instead, they preferred to rely
on the use of "post and lintel" techniques, involving vertical uprights (columns or posts)
supporting horizontal beams (lintels). This method, known as trabeated construction, dates
back to earliest times when temples were made from timber and clay, and was later applied
to stone posts and horizontal stone beams. However, it remained a relatively primitive
method of roofing an area, since it required a large number of supporting columns.

The stone columns themselves usually consisted of a series of solid stone "drums" - set one
upon the other, without mortar - but sometimes joined inside with bronze pegs. The
diameter of columns usually decreases from the bottom upwards, and to correct any illusion
of concavity, Greek architects usually tapered them with a slight outward curve: an
architectural technique known as "entasis".

Each column is composed of a shaft and a capital; some also have a base. The shaft may be
decorated with vertical or spiral grooves, called fluting. The capital has two parts: a rounded
lower part (echinus), above which is a square-shaped tablet (abacus). The appearance of the
echinus and abacus varies according to the stylistic "template" or "Order" used in the
temple's construction. Doric Order capitals are plainer and more austere, while Ionic and
Corinthian capitals are more ornate.

9|Page
Entablature and Pediment
The temple's columns support a two-tier horizontal structure: the "entablature" and the
"pediment". The entablature - the first tier - is the major horizontal structural element
supporting the roof, and encircles the whole building. It is made up of three sections. The
lowest section is the "architrave", made up of a series of stone lintels which span the spaces
between the columns. Each joint sits directly above the centre of each capital. The middle
section is the "frieze", consisting of a broad horizontal band of relief sculpture. In Ionic and
Corinthian temples, the frieze is continuous; in Doric temples sections of frieze (metopes)
alternate with grooved rectangular blocks (triglyphs). The top part of the entablature
immediately under the roof is the "cornice", which overhangs and protects the frieze.

The second tier is the pediment, a shallow triangular structure occupying the front and rear
gable of the building. Traditionally, this triangular space contained the most important
sculptural reliefs on the exterior of the building.

How Stone Temples Were Built

The design and construction of Greek temples was dependent above all on local raw
materials. Fortunately, although Ancient Greece possessed few forests, it had lots of
limestone, which was easily worked. In addition, there were plentiful supplies (on the
mainland and the islands of Paros and Naxos) of high grade white marble for architectural
and sculptural decoration. Lastly, deposits of clay, used for both roof tiles and architectural
decoration, were readily available throughout the country, notably around Athens.

However, the quarrying and transport of stone was both costly and labour-intensive, and
typically accounted for most of the cost of building a temple. It was only the wealth which
Athens had accumulated after the Persian Wars, that enabled Pericles (495-429) to build the
Parthenon (447-422 BCE) and other stone monuments on the Acropolis, at Athens. In some

10 | P a g e
cases, older stone monuments were cannibalized for their marble and other precious
stones.

Typically, each building project was controlled and supervised by the architect, who oversaw
every aspect of construction. He selected the stone, managed its extraction, and supervised
the craftsmen who cut and shaped it at the quarry. At the building site, master stone
masons made the final precise carvings, to ensure that each stone block would slot into
place without the need for mortar. After this, labourers hoisted

each block into position. The architect also supervised the professional sculptors, who
carved the reliefs on the frieze, metopes and pediments, as well as the painters who painted
the sculptures and various architectural elements of the building.

Don't forget, the Greeks regularly painted their marble temples. In fact they seem not only
to have painted them, but to have used gaudy colours for the purpose, indulging generously
in red, blue, and gold. There must have been some attempt to correlate colour and
structure, with the structural members kept clear and outstanding, the lower parts little
coloured, and the upper parts alone flowering in hue as they did in sculptural adornment,
but all evidence has long since vanished. See also: Greek Painting: Classical Period, and
Greek Painting: Hellenistic Period.

Types of Buildings

Greek Temples

The rectangular temple is the most common and best-known form of Greek public
architecture. The temple did not serve the same function as a modern church, since the
altar stood under the open sky in the Temenos or sacred precinct, often directly before the
temple. Temples served as the location of a cult image and as a storage place or strong
room for the treasury associated with the cult of the god in question, and as a place for
devotees of the god to leave their votive offerings, such as statues, helmets and weapons.
Some Greek temples appear to have been oriented astronomically. The temple was
generally part of a religious precinct known as the
acropolis. According to Aristotle, '"the site should be a spot seen far and wide, which gives
good elevation to virtue and towers over the neighbourhood". Small circular temples,
Tholos were also constructed, as well as small temple-like buildings that served as treasuries
for specific groups of donors. Even more so the rectangular shape of the temples and most
temples were no ordinary rectangular buildings as the Greek architects gave meaning to
every aspect of their design. As their understanding of nature grew their passion for
perfection drove them to discover a formula known as the golden ration. This ration is
known as the divine ratio as it was considered to be a divine rule of beauty or a concept
every pleasing thing had in common. Golden Ratio has been in use for at least 4000 years.
Many people argue that the ancient Greek architects used the golden ratio to build the

11 | P a g e
legendary pyramids. To determine the pleasing relationship between the width and height
of a building, the Greek architects used golden ratio. The Greeks have derived the golden
ratio from the Fibonacci sequence of numbers; 0, 1,1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21; a naturally occurring
sequence of numbers that can be found on every nook cranny of the nature.

The Golden Rectangle

From the great pyramids to the Parthenon, the Greek architects has used the golden ratio to
attain perfection in the structure. The golden ratio has been applied for making the building
organic looking and more composed to look at. The Greeks are thought by some to have
based the design of the Parthenon on this proportion, but this is subject to some conjecture.
Phidias (500 BC – 432 BC), a Greek sculptor and mathematician, studied phi and applied it to
the design of sculptures for the Parthenon.

Plato (circa 428 BC – 347 BC), in his views on natural science and cosmology presented in his
“Timaeus,” considered the golden section to be the most binding of all mathematical
relationships and the key to the physics of the cosmos.

Euclid (365 BC – 300 BC), in “Elements,” referred to dividing a line at the 0.6180399… point
as “dividing a line in the extreme and mean ratio.” This later gave rise to the use of the term
mean in the golden mean. He also linked this number to the construction of a pentagram.

12 | P a g e
A Doric Temple

The Architectural Orders

There are five orders of classical architecture - Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, Tuscan, and
Composite - all named as such in later Roman times. Greek architects created the first three
and hugely influenced the latter two which were composites rather than genuine
innovations. An order, properly speaking, is a combination of a certain style of column with
or without a base and an entablature (what the column supports: the architrave, frieze, and
cornice).

The Doric column evolved from earlier use of wooden pillars. This was a vertical fluted
column shaft, thinner at its top, with no base and a simple capital below a square abacus.
The entablature frieze carried alternating triglyphs and metopes.

The Ionic order, with origins in mid-6th century BCE Asia Minor, added a base and volute, or
scroll capital, to a slimmer, straighter column. The Ionic entablature often carries a frieze
with richly carved sculpture.

The Corinthian column, invented in Athens in the 5th century BCE, is similar to the Ionic but
topped by a more decorative capital of stylized acanthus and fern leaves. These orders
became the basic grammar of western architecture and it is difficult to walk in any modern
city and not see examples of them in one form or another.

13 | P a g e
The Theatre

Another distinctive contribution of Greek architecture to world culture was the

amphitheatre. Bronze Age Minoan sites such as Phaistos had large stepped-courts which are
thought to have been used for spectacles such as religious processions and bull-leaping
sports. Then from the late 6th century BCE we have a rectangular theatre-like structure
from Thorikos in Attica which had a temple dedicated to Dionysos at one end. This would
suggest it was used during Dionyistic festivals, at which dramas were often presented.

However, it was from the 5th century BCE that the Greek amphitheater took on its
recognizable and most influential form. This was an open-air and approximately semi-
circular arrangement of rising rows of seats (theotron) which provided excellent acoustics.
The stage or orchestra was also semi-circular and backed by a screen or skene, which would
become more and more monumental in the following centuries. Monumental arches often
provided the entrances (paradoi) on either side of the stage.

Examples abound throughout the Greek world and many theatres have survived remarkably
well. One of the most celebrated is the theatre of Dionysus Eleutherius on the southern
slope of Athens' acropolis where the great plays of Sophocles, Euripedes, Aeschylus, and
Aristophanes were first performed. One of the largest is the theatre of Argos which had a
capacity for 20,000 spectators, and one of the best preserved is the theatre of Epidaurus
which continues every summer to host major dramatic performances. Theatres were used

14 | P a g e
not only for the presentation of plays but also hosted poetry recitals and musical
competitions.

Greek Theatre

Domestic Architecture

Considering more modest structures, there were fountain houses (from the 6th century
BCE) in many Greek cites where people could easily collect water and perhaps, as black-
figure pottery scenes suggest, socialise. Regarding private homes, these were usually
constructed with mud brick, had packed earth floors, and were built to no particular design.
One- or two-storied houses were the norm. Later, from the 5th century BCE, better houses
were built in stone, usually with plastered exterior and frescoed interior walls. Also, there
was often no particular effort at town planning which usually resulted in a maze of narrow
chaotic streets, even in such great cities as Athens. Colonies in Magna Graecia, as we have
seen in Selinus, were something of an exception and often had more regular street plans, no
doubt a benefit of constructing a town from scratch.

15 | P a g e
In all this building we can see a common ground which we can use to characterize the
architecture that brought them into being.

• The basic element is the column, considered an essential element of the aesthetics
of his art.

• Greek architecture is fundamentally adentellada, dominating the straight lines, both

horizontal and vertical, do not use the vault.

• It is monumental without being colossal like Egypt.

• It has a very balanced architectural style, everything is made with a measure, a

canon.

• It is an architecture with great perfection and harmony, making it beautiful.

• Its constructions always carry decorative elements, such as borders, rosettes, ovals,
pearls.

• The materials frequently used were limestone and marble, for columns, walls and
elevated portions of temples and public buildings; terracotta, for ornaments; and
metals, especially bronze, for decorative details, using adobe for the poorest and
unimportant constructions.

• All most all of their building had a very deep connection to the thinking of the
progenitor be it his religion, philosophy or even culture but also had a very deep ties
to more natural elements.

16 | P a g e
 • Greek architecture is known for intricate detail, symmetry, harmony, and balance.

Critiques on Greek Architecture

Most architects, designers or even normal people see these works of art as the
accomplishment of humanity when it was at its peak. Many famous architects even
incorporate most of the principles of Greek architecture in their design. That being said it is
also an impractical type of style to follow at the modern age. In the 19 th century we
witnessed the start of the Greek revival style of architecture where the
followers would try to revive the style of thinking of that time. But this posed a very difficult
problem as the Greek architecture requires a lot of ornamental and aesthetically purposed
partitions that have no practical functions. This was not only the case as the modern
thinking somewhat defined the principles of that time as wasteful. Although each elements
had its own meaning or philosophy to why it was built or put their, this had little to no
meaning in the constantly evolving modern age. The modern movement grew out of the
Industrial Revolution, so it is only logical that we make a natural and direct link between
modern architecture and new methods of construction. Today we fundamentally think of
architecture in terms of quality of space. If we look back in time, this was not always the
case.

New means of production introduced new formal possibilities, leading to new conceptions
of architecture. As Wigley states: “Each subsequent change … has to be differentiated from
fashion by being tied to the logic of a fundamental break necessitated by new materials and
the technologies by which they are assembled. Construction and function must be seen to
immobilize and thereby subordinate all the surfaces of architecture.” The confluence of new
means of production with the subordinated surface redefined the essence of architecture as
a purely spatial experience.

If ornament used to be the “concealment of an internal disorder,” (White Out, p. 154), the
neutral surface exposes spatial order. We see this clearly in William Curtis’ praise of Le
Corbusier’s Villa Savoye: “Even a scrupulous inspection of photographs and drawings cannot
hope to recreate the feeling of space, the sense of rising up into an illuminated realm, or the
intensive lyricism of sun-lit geometries seen through layers of semireflecting glass. The
building imposes its own order on the senses through sheer sculptural power ... windows,
tiles, pilotis and other naked facts are raised to a new level of significance through an
intense abstraction.”

17 | P a g e
Villa Savoye By Le Corbusier

The modernist critique of ornament is a wake-up call to abandon the comfort of

familiarity, in order to redefine the future of architecture in which anything is possible.
Through the work of Corbusier and others, the neutral undecorated surface becomes the
medium of re-invention. These schools of thought make the Greek architecture somewhat
invalid and over exaggerated at that time. But who is to say which one is correct and which
is wrong, as both have their own way of defining re inventing inspiring or even changing the
whole theme of architecture.

In conclusion then, we may say that ancient Greek architecture has provided not only many
of the staple features of modern western architecture, but it has also given the world truly
magnificent buildings which have literally stood the test of time and continue to inspire
admiration and awe. They were also able to achieve what others believed to be impossible.
They were able to convey tell and preach of their philosophy thinking style and culture not
through words but though art. Most especially through their architecture. Many of these
buildings - the Parthenon, the Caryatid porch of the Erechtheion, the volute of an Ionic
capital to name just three - have become the instantly recognizable and iconic symbols of
not only ancient Greece but of architecture as well.

18 | P a g e
 Roman Architecture

E
mpires have been identified in various ways such as by the land area under their
control, by their duration, their level of economic influence, or military might. The
Roman Empire was not the world’s largest and its duration, although notable, was
not extraordinary. Military power was necessary for conquering the area brought under the
control of the Empire. However, for the Romans, the ability and capacity for construction is
what identified and expressed the Empire when it began and identifies the Empire today.
The materials used, construction techniques employed, and architectural styles for
structures for government, entertainment, dwellings, bridges, and aqueducts will be
discussed. Because of the quantity of construction, the extent to which it was distributed
across the Empire, and the significant amount remaining today, the Roman Empire is
expressed and identified by what the Romans built, how it was built, and the architectural
style employed.

Roman Empire Begins

While borrowing much from the preceding Etruscan architecture, such as the use of
hydraulics and the construction of arches, Roman prestige architecture remained firmly
under the spell of Ancient Greek architecture and the classical orders. This came initially
from Magna Graecia, the Greek colonies in southern Italy, and indirectly from Greek
influence on the Etruscans, but after the Roman conquest of Greece directly from the best
classical and Hellenistic examples in the Greek world. The influence is evident in many ways;
for example, in the introduction and use of the Triclinium in Roman villas as a place and
manner of dining. Roman builders employed Greeks in many capacities, especially in the
great boom in construction in the early Empire.

“Now is the time to proceed to the wonders of Rome, to examine what we

have learned over 800 years and to show that we have conquered the
world with our buildings too.”

Pliny, XXXVI, 101.

With these words Pliny defines the perspective of Rome regarding the ability of
their structures to state the power of the Empire. Historian John Landels explains that
Roman contribution to technology was almost entirely in the field of practical application,
acknowledged by Pliny in the above excerpt. Historian Henry Hodges also reinforces this
position but gives the Romans credit for using ideas from elsewhere to their greatest
advantage. Applying technology, as it relates to materials, methods of construction, and

19 | P a g e
architectural characteristics, produced structures that became, and remain, identifiable as
the Roman Empire.

The primary motive for the establishment and expansion of empire is the need for
raw materials, exerting economic influence, or exerting military influence. The means for
initiating empire are military and economic power. The Romans possessed both, and the
reasons the Republic became an empire are far beyond the scope of this paper. But let’s try
demonstrate how Rome, having achieved empire, expressed its imperial power through its
structures.

The Roman Republic became Imperial Rome with the reign of Augustus (Caius Octavius) as
its first Emperor. Augustus’ reign was forty-one years, from 27 BC to AD
14. Sir Bannister Fletcher in A History of Architecture relates the boast of Augustus that 3 he
found Rome a city of brick and left it one of marble. Fletcher explains further that Augustus
initiated building, based on Republican architecture, with heavy Hellenistic influences, in
order to improve the capital city of the Empire.
One individual’s wishes, desires, and motivation, that of Augustus, impacted
historical events, and his desire to drape Rome in marble provides one example of how the
Empire came to be identified by use of a particular building material. The splendor and
grandeur of Rome today, even in ruin, remains impressive. The Colosseum, Pantheon,
arches, and spans of aqueducts are existing structures that produce admiration for the
architectural and construction abilities of the Romans. These structures were used to
expand, maintain and identify the world’s most impressive empire.

Republican Period

Republican Roman architecture was influenced by the Etruscans who were the early kings of
Rome; the Etruscans were in turn influenced by Greek architecture. The Temple of Jupiter
on the Capitoline Hill in Rome, begun in the late 6th century B.C.E., bears all the hallmarks of
Etruscan architecture. The temple was erected from local tufa on a high podium and what is
most characteristic is its frontality. The porch is very deep and the visitor is meant to
approach from only one access point, rather than walk all the way around, as was common
in Greek temples. Also, the presence of three cellas, or cult rooms, was also unique.

The Temple of Jupiter would remain influential in temple design for much of the Republican
period. Drawing on such deep and rich traditions didn’t mean that Roman architects were
unwilling to try new things. In the late Republican period, architects began to experiment
with concrete, testing its capability to see how the material might allow them to build on a
grand scale.

20 | P a g e
Temple Of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, Capitoline Hill, Rome (Reconstruction
Courtesy Dr. Bernard Frischer)

Imperial Period

The Emperor Nero began building his infamous Domus Aurea, or Golden House, after a great
fire swept through Rome in 64 C.E. and destroyed much of the downtown area. The
destruction allowed Nero to take over valuable real estate for his own building project; a vast
new villa. Although the choice was not in the public interest, Nero’s desire to live in grand
fashion did spur on the architectural revolution in Rome. The architects, Severus and Celer,
are known (thanks to the Roman historian Tacitus), and they built a grand palace, complete
with courtyards, dining rooms, colonnades and fountains. They also used concrete
extensively, including barrel vaults and domes throughout the complex. What makes the
Golden House unique in Roman architecture is that Severus and Celer were using concrete in
new and exciting ways; rather than utilizing the material for just its structural purposes, the
architects began to experiment with concrete in aesthetic modes, for instance, to make
expansive domed spaces.

21 | P a g e
Octagon Room, Domus Aurea, Rome, c. 64-68 c.e.

Architectural Characteristics

Building Materials

The primary focus of this section is the materials and methods employed. Roman builders
utilized naturally occurring materials, primarily stone, timber and marble. Manufactured
materials consisted of brick and glass and composite materials consisted of concrete. These
materials were available within close proximity to the city of Rome and generally
throughout the European area of the Empire. Innovation related to this use of materials was
indeed more a matter of seizing opportunity because materials used by the Romans had
been used by preceding cultures. The use of stone and timber is basic to a primitive 6 level
of construction. The Romans made use of these basic materials, but additionally made use
of mass produced materials such as brick and concrete, allowing rapid expansion and
extensive reach of the Empire.

Roman builders employed the use of several varieties of stone, each valuable for
certain qualities: strength, durability, and aesthetics. Stone supply was gathered locally and
some quarried depending on availability. Stone served the Empire as a basic construction
material. Brick and concrete were used when speed and repeatability of construction were

22 | P a g e
critical. At a basic level, stone is the most common and logically used building material. Even
the most primitive culture would be expected to gather and arrange stones into some type
of shelter. Likewise, it would be expected the Romans would make use of stones for
construction. Based on the level of advancement of the culture, their abilities in stone
masonry exhibited a high level of complexity and finish. This was achieved by use of a
variety of stone cutting tools; cutting hammer (bladed), scabbling hammer (pointed), stone
mason’s hammer (ax), mallet, punch, chisel, saw, and square. This set of tools remains the
same for stone masons in the twenty-first century.

Roman architectural revolution

The Roman architectural revolution, also known as the "concrete revolution", was the
widespread use in Roman architecture of the previously little-used architectural forms of
the arch, vault, and dome. For the first time in history, their potential was fully exploited in
the construction of a wide range of civil engineering structures, public buildings, and military
facilities. These included amphitheater, aqueducts, baths, bridges, circuses, dams, domes,
harbours, temples, and theatres.
A crucial factor in this development, which saw a trend toward monumental architecture,
was the invention of Roman concrete (opus caementicium), which led to the liberation of
shapes from the dictates of the traditional materials of stone and brick. These enabled the
building of the many aqueducts throughout the Roman Empire, such as the Aqueduct of
Segovia, the Pont du Gard, and the eleven aqueducts of Rome. The same concepts produced
numerous bridges, some of which are still in daily use, for example the Puente Romano at
Mérida in Spain, and the Pont Julien and the bridge at Vaison-la-Romaine, both in Provence,
France.

TYPES OF STRUCTURES

Before we get into the types of

structure we need to first look an
architect that dominated the roman
architecture at that time and even
wrote several books that to this day still
is recommended for young architects to
read, Vitruvius. He was a roman
architect and engineer during the 1st
century BC, known for his multi-volume
work entitled De architectura. He
originated the idea that all buildings
should have three attributes:

23 | P a g e
 firmitas , utilitus and venustas. These principles were later widely adopted in Roman
architecture. His discussion of perfect proportion in architecture and the human body led to
the famous Renaissance drawing of the Vitruvian Man by Leonardo da Vinci.

Most of the structures seen below constitutes the principles preached by Vitruvius.

Dome
The dome permitted construction of vaulted ceilings without crossbeams and made possible
large covered public space such as public baths and basilicas, such as Hadrian's Pantheon,
the Baths of Diocletian and the Baths of Caracalla, all in Rome.
The Romans first adopted the arch from the Etruscans and implemented it in their own
building. The use of arches that spring directly from the tops of columns was a Roman
development, seen from the 1st century AD, that was very widely adopted in medieval
Western, Byzantine and Islamic architecture.

The Pantheon’s inner Dome

Forums
The forum was a central open space used as a meeting place, market, or gathering
place for political discussion or demonstration, a central city location critical for
communicating ideas and news. The forum was comprised of several public buildings that
included markets, courts, jails, and government facilities. Forums were not only found in
Rome, but also in small towns. Many of these were not built in the symmetrical style desired
in Rome. Vitruvius’ recommendation was that the forum be built sized to the population, so

24 | P a g e
it would not be cramped, or not look deserted if built too large. The Forum Romanum, the
most important in the city of Rome, was in the valley between the “hills” of Rome. Forum
Romanum was an all-purpose forum, not built perfectly rectangular. As an all-purpose
forum, the Forum originally contained shops, displays, and even some sporting contests
which were later removed and relegated to the theater and the circus. The Forum, with its
porticos and colonnades surrounded by temples and basilicas, would have presented an
impressive sight.

Forum Of Ancient Rome Civilization

Basilica
The Roman basilica was a large public building where business or legal matters could be
transacted. They were normally where the magistrates held court, and used for other
official ceremonies, having many of the functions of the modern town hall. The first basilicas
had no religious function at all. As early as the time of Augustus, a public basilica for
transacting business had been part of any settlement that considered itself a city, used in
the same way as the late medieval covered market houses of northern Europe, where the
meeting room, for lack of urban space, was set above the arcades, however. Although their
form was variable, basilicas often contained interior colonnades that divided the space,
giving aisles or arcaded spaces on one or both sides, with an apse at one end (or less often
at each end), where the magistrates sat, often on a slightly raised dais. The central aisle
tended to be wide and was higher than the flanking aisles, so that light could penetrate
through the clerestory windows. The oldest known basilica, the Basilica Porcia, was built in
Rome in 184 BC by Cato the Elder during the time he was censor. Other early examples

25 | P a g e
include the basilica at Pompeii (late 2nd century BC). After Christianity became the official
religion, the basilica shape was found appropriate for the first large public churches, with
the attraction of avoiding reminiscences of
the Greeco-Roman temple form.

Reconstruction of the Basilica of Maxentius, Rome

Baths
Vitruvius recommended the site for construction of baths to be as warm as possible, facing
away from north and northwest winds, so that the caldera (hot room) and tepidaria (warm
room) will have light from the west in winter. He instructed that care should be taken that
men’s and women’s caldaria be connected and in the same area so a common furnace can
be shared.A special feature of Roman bath construction was the suspended floor, which
allowed heat to be circulated underneath to regulate the temperature of the floor. The
introduction of this feature coincides with the introduction of window glass which occurred
sometime in the late first century AD. The baths constructed prior to this were built with
very small windows, causing the interior of the bath to be quite dark.

Vitruvius provided the following instructions for the construction of the suspended floor:
First, the floor is laid with one and one-half foot tiles that incline toward the furnace, so that
if a ball is thrown in it cannot stay in place, but returns to the furnace on its own accord. In
this way flame will circulate more easily under the suspended floor. On top of this piers of
eight inch tiles should be placed so that two foot tiles can be placed over them. The piers
should be two feet high and they should be mortared with clay mixed in with hair and over
them place the two foot tiles, which will hold up the pavement. Vitruvius’s instructions

26 | P a g e
provided an insight into the complex construction techniques applied by the Romans. There
does, however, seem to be a discrepancy. Sear describes the circulation type of construction
to have begun late in the first century AD with the rebuilding of the Baths of Agrippa as the
Baths of Nero. Vitruvius wrote the Ten Books between 30 and 20 BC. If he knew about this
type of construction then, it is curious that the practice was not used until almost a century
later. Roman baths display the customs and style of living of a pleasure loving people. They
were not only built for luxurious bathing, but were a place for social life, news, gossip,
lectures, and games (board games, exercise, games with balls). The baths were an integral
part of Roman life. Traditionally there was a small charge to enter the baths but some
emperors opened them to the public free of charge. Baths were arranged with a central hall
with the caldaria room, tepidaria room, and frigidarium attached. Several other services
were available at baths ranging from barbers, manicurists, shampooers, and oil anointers.
There was usually an open garden adjoining the bath and a running track and seats for
spectators. Other adjoining structures contained lecture rooms, shops, and housing for the
many slaves who staffed the bath. The City contained most of the baths but baths were also
constructed in Pompeii, North Africa, Germany, and England. The Roman baths provided a
practical expression of empire because the baths were an essential component of the
everyday life of Roman citizens and additionally part of the means of informal
communication for the empire.

Though not the focus of this paper, slave labor was a key factor in the enjoyment of life for
the Roman citizen and would have been, as mentioned, critical for the operation of the
bath. Pliny, Frontinus, Livy, and Vitruvius made reference to slaves on a limited basis and
made clear the commonality of slaves in the Roman society. White, Sear, Adam, and
Fletcher refer in fact to “numerous,” “hundreds,” and “large quantities” of servile labor. The
purpose here is to acknowledge the role of slaves to the operation of these structures and
their importance therefore in producing and expressing empire. Baths were exported to the
far reaches of the Empire and as a result their luxury was exposed to all the Empire. This
would generate pleasure and enjoyment for the citizens who could participate and envy for
those who could not.

The baths of the Empire were a luxury, a trait of a pleasure loving populace. The origin of
this need for pleasure was human nature but what provided it was the Empire. The wealth,
innovation, and stability of the Empire allowed for this unique experience to be created.

27 | P a g e
In the Roman Baths, Fyodor Bronnikov

Theaters
Similar in nature to baths, theaters were a means of entertainment rather than
pleasure, but were also luxury experienced by the Romans because of the Empire. With
basic needs provided, the populace was allowed to turn its attention to non-essential
activities. The theater was one of several entertainment facilities produced by the
Romans in addition to the amphitheater and the circus. The recommendation for the site
and building of theaters by Vitruivus is quite interesting.

The theater should be built in the forum which is understandable as this was the primary
center of activity. His initial concern is not about design or materials, but location, that the
site should be as healthful as possible according to what I have written in my first book
about the healthfulness of sites for laying out city walls. For the spectators as plays, sitting
from the beginning to end with their spouses and children, are held captive by their
enjoyment; because of their pleasure their motionless bodies have wide open pores, in
which the breath of wind can easily take hold. And if these winds should come from swampy
areas of other unhealthy places, they will pour their harmful vapors into the spectators’
bodies. And therefore, if the site for the theater is chosen with slightly more care, defects
can be avoided. Roman theaters were adopted from the Greeks and were limited to a
semicircle.

They were usually on the side of a hill to allow the stepped seating to be arranged and
constructed with some ease. Where an appropriate hillside was not available, the theater

28 | P a g e
was constructed using concrete vaulting supporting the tiers of seats. In the case of
vaulted construction, a shelter for inclement weather was a bonus. 45
There are numerous examples of these structures: The Theater Orange, in
Orange, France, was built in AD 50, holds 7,000 spectators, and was constructed using a
combination of concrete and the use of a hillside. The semicircle is 340 feet in diameter,
the stage 203 feet wide, 45 feet deep. A portion of the stage wall remains with holes for
masts that supported an awning over the stage.
The Theater of Marcellus in Rome, built in the last decade of the first century BC,
was built on a level site so the construction is radiating walls of vaulted concrete.
Theaters were constructed throughout the Empire: Herodes Atticus in Athens, Small
Theater and Theater Osita in Pompeii, with others in Sicily, Florence, North Africa, and
England. Theaters were constructed throughout the empire providing opportunities for
entertainment for citizens. Entertainment would not have been contemplated nor possible
had it not been for the power of the Empire.

Theater of Marcellus

Circuses
The Roman circus was built to accommodate horse and chariot racing, and those
built were grand and magnificent structures, exceeding the grandeur of the amphitheater.
Due to its imposing size, one lane of the Circus Maximus reached almost half a mile.
Chariot racing was very popular in Rome and much money was spent on horses and
riders. Charioteers were the equivalent of modern celebrities and they were paid
handsomely and as in modern times, betting produced even more interest.
The design of the circus was simple as banks of seats around the track were
constructed by use of vaulted concrete, necessary due to the level site. The Circus
Maximus, Rome, 46 BC, was the largest of the circuses and measured 2,000 feet in

29 | P a g e
length, 650 feet in width and is estimated to have seated 250,000 spectators. A long
straight lane on each side of a divider called a spina, provided the racing circuit. Like the
Colosseum, the Circus Maximus’ exterior was adorned with hundreds of arches.
The theater, amphitheater, and circus provide excellent examples of the
expression of empire through architecture and structures. The theater, amphitheater, and
circus were venues for entertainment and produced desire throughout the region to
participate in the pleasurable activity. But the structures, regardless of the activity
conducted in them, were themselves monuments of empire, the size alone providing a
powerful statement of empire. The Roman culture provided its citizens with remarkable
experiences in social gathering and entertainment and at the same time expressed the
strength, vitality, and authority of the Roman Empire.

Circus Maximus

Dwellings
There were four types of Roman dwellings: The domus or private home, the villa
or country house, the imperial palace, and the insula or many-storied tenement.
The domus or private house combined features from the Etruscans and Greeks.
An atrium (main hall of a traditional Roman house, roofed or unroofed, usually
containing a water tank in the floor beneath) formed the public portion of the building
with a courtyard, surrounded by apartments. According to Vitruvius the Greeks did not
use atria. The Roman private house is dated earlier than the more public buildings with
preserved examples going back to the third and fourth centuries BC. Private houses had
water delivery via pipes and even though public baths were available, most of the larger
houses had their own baths.

30 | P a g e
Hadrian’s Villa is an example of the country house. Completed in AD 124, it is
essentially a large park with buildings scattered throughout the seven square mile
property. Hadrian’s Villa contains colonnaded courtyards, apartments, and halls. In
addition to the Imperial apartment there were terraces, colonnades, theaters, and baths.
All this combined for an opulent display of design and construction at the height of the
Empire.

Hadrian’s Villa in Tivoli

Of all the types of dwellings of Rome, the tenement and the palace provide the
greatest opportunity for expression of empire. The domus and villa, though impressive,
were both rare and the villa so removed from the populace as to be virtually invisible.
The imperial palace and the tenement, however, provided for expression of empire
although in very different ways. The palace was the very essence of imperial Rome:
opulent, grand, extravagant, and excessive – all the things associated with wealth and
power. A physical location, high on the Palatine Hill in the center of the City, reinforced
the importance, wealth, and power of the emperor, a perfect representative of the Empire.

31 | P a g e
Diocletian’s Palace

Aqueducts
Roman aqueducts have been the subject of much study and are familiar even to
the casual observer. An adequate water supply was of primary importance to the
Romans. Vitruvius devoted Book Eight of the Ten Books of Architecture to water. He
began by instructing on how to find water, by obtaining water from rain, from rivers, and
from springs. He then explained the various methods of testing to determine if the water
is of a suitable quality.

In chapter six Vitruvius discussed water supply and provided his recommendations
regarding the delivery of water: “There are three types of watercourses:
in open canals with masonry channels, or lead pipes, or terracotta tubing. These are the
principles for each: for channels, the masonry should be as solid as possible, and the floor
of the watercourse should have a slope calculated to be no less than half a foot every
hundred feet. The masonry should be vaulted so that the sun touches the water as little as
possible.” The remainder of Vitruvius’ recommendations regarding water delivery are
related to piping and trenching.

It seems odd that Vitruvius would devote so little space

to aqueducts, if it can be concluded he was referring to them at all. Aqua Appia, Aqua 53
Anio Vitus, and Aqua Tepula were all constructed from the fourth through the first
centuries BC so he must have been aware of the concept. Most aqueducts were built
during the Empire so Viturvius’ knowledge of them could have been limited, or his
perception of their importance could have been negatively influenced.

32 | P a g e
Below is a listing of Roman aqueducts and their length.
Rome:
Appia 16 miles
Anio Vetus 40
Marcia 56
Tepula 18
Julia 14
Virgo 20
Alsietina 20
Claudia 42
Anio Novus 53
Traiana 36
Alexandria 22

33 | P a g e
City Design

The Temple of Claudius to the south (left) of the Colosseum (model of Imperial Rome at the
Museo della civiltà romana in
Rome)

The ancient Romans employed regular orthogonal structures on which they molded their
colonies. They probably were inspired by Greek and Hellenic examples, as well as by
regularly planned cities that were built by the Etruscans in Italy. The Romans used a
consolidated scheme for city planning, developed for military defense and civil convenience.
The basic plan consisted of a central forum with city services, surrounded by a compact,
rectilinear grid of streets, and wrapped in a wall for defense. To reduce travel times, two
diagonal streets crossed the square grid, passing through the central square. A river usually
flowed through the city, providing water, transport, and sewage disposal. Hundreds of
towns and cities were built by the Romans throughout their Empire.

Roman orders

The Tuscan order is a Roman adaptation of the Doric. The

Tuscan has an unfluted shaft and a simple echinus-abacus
capital. It is similar in proportion and profile to the Roman
Doricbut is much plainer. The column is seven diameters high.
This order is the most solid in appearance of all the orders.

34 | P a g e
The Composite order, which was not ranked as a separate
order until the Renaissance, is a late Roman development
of the Corinthian. It is called Composite because its capital
is composed of Ionic volutes and Corinthian acanthus-leaf
decoration. The column is 10 diameters high.

Critiques on Roman Architecture

Although Roman architecture has a more functional approach to the design of its structures
than the Greeks it still stands that their overall use of material isn’t practical as they require
a lot of stones, marbles or wood many of which is really expensive to build on in the modern
age. Although the Romans went an extra step and used concrete, it still is a fact that most of
their structures consists of stone which makes it improbable to build tall structures as it
inhibits them to do or construct more.

35 | P a g e
Comparison
Greek and Roman architecture are together referred to as “Classical architecture,” as they
share many characteristics including an adherence to the Classical Greek Orders of
Architecture and a sense of symmetry and balance. Greek and Roman architecture is
relatively similar, they were inspired by the Greeks existing work and adapted their own
styles around it. Although the Romans were inspired by the Greeks which resulted in many
similarities, there are still many differences, such as the materials they chose to use. They
both commonly constructed their buildings from marble or limestone – but, the Romans
perfected the use of concrete in buildings which allowed them to create more free-flowing
structures. In relation to the styles of columns they used, they were all favoured by both the
Greeks and the Romans and made a persistent appearance in most of their buildings.
Although, the Greeks did prefer the use of the Doric and Ionic orders, whereas the Romans
preferred the more ornate Corinthian order.

The purpose of the Greeks and Romans architecture was also different. Most of the existing
Greek architecture was designed as art to honor their gods which resulted in a less ornate
interior. Due to the Romans advances in material technology, a greater variety of Roman
buildings still exist today. Roman architecture was beautiful internally and externally,
mirroring “the pursuit of pleasure, an essential part of Roman culture” (Faller, M)

In relation to more of the construction details, the Greeks work was more equilateral which
was known as “post and lintel construction”. The Romans took great credit for grasping the
arch and the dome, which are a prominent feature in ancient Roman architecture, but not in
Greek architecture.

The Parthenon and the Pantheon

The Parthenon and the Pantheon are both ancient temples – the Parthenon was built in
Greece for their god Athena and the Pantheon was constructed in Rome to celebrate the
Roman gods. The Parthenon was first to be constructed in 126 AD and the Pantheon was
constructed about six centuries later around 447 – 438 BC. Both these temples have many
similarities and differences due to the Romans adapting the Greeks processes. The majority
of the exterior design of the Pantheon is adapted from traditional, ancient Greek
architecture, such as that of the Parthenon. It is said that both of these temples functioned
as churches during the middle ages and have both faced rebuilding. The religious links of the
Pantheon prevented it from being damaged by loots, but unfortunately many parts of the
Parthenon were stolen in the 1700s. Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist
with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full
dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

36 | P a g e
Of course, the Parthenon was a Doric temple which was supported by Ionic columns. The
floor was constructed wholly of marble, where the base was constructed from limestone –
typical materials used by the Greeks. “The east pediment narrates the birth of Athena, while
the west pediment shows the contest between Athena and Poseidon to become the city’s
patron god”.

This creates a contrast to the Pantheon, which was a concrete dome supported by the
ornate Corinthian columns. They were interested in capturing more beauty with small,
distinctive details. Again, typical materials such as marble and concrete were used to
construct this temple.

But, there are some key differences. Whereas the Greeks favored marble, the Romans
invented concrete, and they relied on this key building material in much of their
architecture. Romans also emphasized circular forms and made extensive use of the arch,
vault, and dome in their building projects, unlike the post-and-lintel structure of Greek
buildings. While Greek buildings tended to feature cramped interiors built on a more human
scale, Roman buildings had dramatically high ceilings and were generally more flamboyant
than their Greek counterparts.

37 | P a g e
Bibliography

Radianz, Arch Daily, The classical language of Architecture, WorldHistory.org,

Hellenic studies Oxford university press, The oxford Handbook, Goldennumber.net,

10 books on Architecture Marcus Vitruvius, Wikipedia, oct.mit.edu, Towards a new

architecture by Le Corbusier, Adam, Jean Pierre. Roman Building: Materials and

Techniques. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1994, The Genesis of Roman

Architecture. New Haven: Yale University Press 2016

38 | P a g e
This Project was completed due to the diligent and hard work of the

following Architecture Students.

1. Eyuel Kokeb

2. Sefanit Mesfin

3. Mikias Gebru

4. Dawit Mulugeta

5. Surafel Shiferaw

Thank you for taking your time on reviewing our work.

39 | P a g e