Aqueducts, villas, basilicas and forums all survive to show the detailed planning of urban centres. As more Roman complexes survived, more is known of the non-religious structures built by the Romans. The columns were transformed in to decoration while arches became the practical form for engineering. When used, these three always had a system of Corinthian superimposed on Ionic with Doric at the base. Romans used the Corinthian order most, as well as the Ionic but more rarely Doric. Less inventive then the Greeks, they drew selectively from their techniques. Rome followed Greece’s example, but added a more rigid, structural level. These were carried through to the stone and masonry buildings and became more of a design factor then a functional quality. Orders originated from when temples were wooden, when the joins between beams would have a characteristic shape, defining how it was built. Although there are some obvious differences, classifying the three orders comes down to proportion and minute details. The third order, Corinthian, came later, being more ornamented. Doric is solid, thick but detailed, common within mainland Greece, while Ionic is thinner, more graceful and while less preserved, more frequent in western Turkey. The first two styles, Doric and Ionic, are the iconic Greek ruins. An enormous emphasis in Greek Architecture was placed on the orders: the qualities of the columns used in building. Not as much is known of secular buildings, but this is partly because temples incorporated many structures (theatres, treasuries and altars) in to their own. The best surviving examples are religious buildings, in this case temples. The Mediterranean: Greece was the true beginning of “western” architecture, and of the style named Classical. Knowing what will symbolize a style once it has faded requires it to be ignored for a while. The names and principles given to styles almost always come afterwards, at least 300 years later. This is because the architecture becomes convoluted in the 19th century. Third, the descriptions end in the mid 1800s. For example, the Netherlands were separate from Germany and France, but usually followed their design. The countries described were either leaders in the style or too different to be under the same heading. Second, writing about every city-state, duchy and kingdom would end up as a book and not a report. The churches were structures with the main purposes of inspiring and involving people and they stand out from the more obvious towns and castles which were defensive and utilitarian. Religion is an enormous part of European history and had the more influence and resources than individual nations. Things to note are, first, how much of our knowledge is based on temples and churches. The guide has three parts: a timeline showing how architectural/cultural periods fit into history, a legend of architectural elements and plans and a description of the style in different regions with examples. Design usually reflects the society and politics of its time, making architecture a really good way to learn. It is also hard to appreciate culture and history in Europe without knowing the style and time period of the structures you’re seeing. Architecture is an irritatingly complex study that can be over complicated. I wrote this as a guide to architecture I might see on my trip.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |