Art

The feats accomplished by ancient Roman architecture had clearly established an influence in the history and developments of this art. Since the establishment of the empire along the Tiber, a tradition of building and rebuilding the city as a method of representing an emperors leadership to the citizens had been adapted and continued to affect the governance of many of its emperors. During the imperial period, an emperors building project is most significant for it reflects his career as a leader. And one of the challenges of an emperors responsibility as a builder is surpassing his predecessors achievement while being able to justify his building programs as beneficial rather than extravagant, thus avoiding the criticisms of moral rhetoric in the ancient times.

In ancient Rome, historians had viewed the entire political career of many emperors based on their building programs because the construction of public buildings, temples and imperial palaces used to be one of the main roles of the emperors. Therefore, the political careers of these Roman emperors were shaped by their construction program and what it shows about their character. One notable example is Nero, the Roman emperor during AD 60. He was known to be most passionate and fully devoted to his arts regardless of the cost of his building programs, spending his entire career building the city, and undoubtedly had done it well. However, there were ancient manuscripts questioning his capability as a leader. In fact, under the policy Damnatio Memoriae, in which memories of condemned emperors were lawfully destroyed due to an attempt to remove the memories of these people, Neros honorable monuments and imperial buildings had been destroyed. Ancient historians such as Tacitus, the Elder Pliny, and Seutonius wrote manuscripts criticizing the manner of leadership and Neros private life. Moreover, they questioned Neros building programs judging it to be rooted from selfishness and extravagance. It goes without saying that his excellent building programs were somewhat overlooked due to the negative opinion ancient historians had about him. And this essay, with the purpose of entirely focusing on the building programs of Nero and his successor Vespasian, aims to describe and analyze the construction programs each emperor had adapted and the messages they conveyed to their populace through their building programs.

One of the challenges in analyzing the building programs of each emperor was the lack of validity of the sources such as early manuscripts and writings for we know that in the past, the spread of myth was done to justify and explain certain events. And as Nero was condemned, much of his works and the evidence of them were destroyed. Therefore, a thorough analysis of the sources and the use of contemporary studies are required to be able to produce a detailed picture on how the city of Rome might have looked like during the reign of Nero and Vespasian.

In the ancient times, imperial buildings were not just seen as venues for a particular events or residences. These buildings were peoples way of representing themselves to others. And as a result, many emperors exerted so much effort and budget to make their imperial building express their ideologies and character as a leader. And this is indeed the case with Nero.

During his reign, the laws of nature were said to be defied by the experimental nature of the designs that he contributed into Roman architecture. He is one of the most noted Roman emperors who initiated impressive and distinct ideas in the architecture of Rome. During the beginning of his reign, he inherited a residence called Domus Tiberiana located in the west of Palatine and owned the Garden of Maecenas located at the crown of Esquiline. Thus, it can be assumed that the aim of the construction of Domus Transitoria was to connect the two properties, by a sequence of palatial units to link Esquiline and Palatine.At first, the plan of connecting two hills was criticized by several historians but more criticisms befall on Nero when he led the construction of Domus Aurea, undoubtedly his most controversial work.

Domus Transitoria which was presumably started in 60 AD was still unfinished when it was destroyed by the Great Fire in 64 AD. Its destruction made way to the construction of Neros most controversial building project, Domus Aurea (Golden House), which was much criticized not because of its lack of artistry and creativity but because of its grandiose. This villa whose vastness is still uncertain was labeled by several ancient historians as outrageous and increasingly lavish.

The destruction of Domus Transitoria most likely had given Nero an opportunity to improve its designs and began the construction of Domus Aurea whose design is clearly more ambitious than Domus Transitoria. Although, Domus Transitorias architectural design was also said to be innovative, it is undoubtedly certain that the Golden House was far more daring than Domus Transitoria. And his groundbreaking ideas in the architecture of the Golden House might have given way to many feats in Roman architecture that was to come.

Based on the account of Seutonius, an ancient historian who criticized much of Neros actions described the Golden House as an erected mansion embellished with jewels and gold, and a three-mile long colonnade and having a vestibule in Velia that housed the statue of Nero with a height of approximately 120 feet. The house which was the largest component of Domus Aurea was located in Palatine whereas the huge artificial lake surrounded by elaborate terraces and colonnades covered the Esquiline Hills. Alongside the Caelatian Hills was also a nymphaeum, a huge artificially natural fountain. The villa was divided into two parts the Palatine and Esquillin. The Palatine area is where Nero stayed more often and held his official banquets and meetings. While the Esquillin, based on the descriptions of different sources, showed fine architectural work. And their characteristic which really catches attention was the retraining walls and the detailed and fine masonry done. Its south facade also gave an excellent vista of the city below. And its north side had room vaults with retaining walls of terraces on the northern edges and west edges. This design, which was considered exquisite at that time, must have been seen as grandiose. Another distinct characteristic of Domus Aurea was its pentagonal court, which was open on its southern edge and was not like ordinary courtyards which were closed.

It could be assumed based on Seutoniuss account that there were structures which made Domus Aurea look like there were little cities inside that smaller structures, standing aside the huge lake and the imperial palace, perhaps to make the view grander when seen from the other main buildings surrounding Domus Aurea.
One of the controversies connected to the construction of Domus Aurea was the assumption that Nero started the fire deliberately in order to convey a message that he was an instrument in the rebirth of Rome. It was connected to the legendary fire during 390 wherein Camillus, the citys savior from the Gaulls, was named the second founder of Rome. He convinced the citizens not to abandon the city but instead be united in its restoration. Interestingly, the two events the Great Fire in AD 64 and the fire in 390 both happened on 19 July.

Nero was known to be a lover of attention and popularity, therefore it might be possible that Nero, being familiar with the ancient Roman stories, had intentionally set the city on fire and did it on the anniversary of a legendary day. However, the validity of this theory could not be proven because the fire that was said to happen on 19 July 390 was rumored to be a myth due to an attempt to justify Romes defeat over Gaulls and the chaotic construction of the old Rome after the destruction of the city done by the Gaulls.

Despite of all the controversies attached to the constructions of Domus Aurea, this large piece of architectural design certainly showed how prolific a builder Nero was.

Ancient historians stated that Nero had the Domus Aurea constructed at the expense of his populace who had to find settlements along the hills because this vast villa the Golden House was said to occupy a significant area of the city. Due to this, the early historians implied that Nero was worthy to be condemned because of stealing lands that should have been used by the populace but instead was used for the construction of the Golden House.

On the contrary, there are records which account that the Golden House was hardly a private place only built for Nero, in fact several public banquets and official meetings were held inside the vicinity of the Golden House. Thus, it is possible to conclude that Nero, in the construction of the Golden House, intended to share the luxury and pleasure to his people, while feeding his passion in the achievement of grandiose and fantasy in his building programs. It can be concluded from the evidence that Nero, in different occasions, held gladiator shows to entertain his populace. Thus, it is fair to say that he built this large villa with all its extravagant amenities, not just for himself, but to bring luxury to his populace.

However, the Golden House which may be similar to a park and a venue of entertainment meant for Neros purpose to share entertainment to his citizens was interpreted by many ancient historians as an evidence of the emperors lavishness. Nonetheless, its architecture, which was unlike any imperial building built prior to its establishment, was indeed distinct and splendid, taking Roman architecture to a new level.

In the span of his career, Nero also constructed other public buildings and temples aside from the imperial palace Domus Aurea. And in fact, there was evidence proving that even after Neros condemnation and death, many of the structures built during his reign had still remained. To ensure the continuity of water and food supply, he constructed provisional markets, the harbor in Ottis and aqueducts. All of these were for the advantage of his populace.

Another notable example is the Arci Neroniani which carried the Aqua Claudia to the Claudianum on the Caelian and from there to the Palatine, the Aventine, and the Trastevere region.
The arch was not destroyed because it was useful for the citizens. And indeed many of the buildings Nero had built were in fact utilitarian and answered the needs of the populace.

Some of these were his bath-gymnasium complexes which were built near the Pantheon between AD 60 and 62 and which remained well-maintained even after Neros death due to the obvious benefits it gave the populace. Moreover, he also had bridges like Neros ponds Neronianus and fountains like Domitians Meta Sudans and nympheum, which all survived because of them being beneficial to the people.

Also in 64 AD, Nero added a third permanent artificial body of water called the Stagnum Nerosis (Neros lake) located at the heart of the Golden House, added to the Stagnum Agrippae in the Campus Martius and the Naumachia Augusti across the Tiber. Around the two, Nero had pavillions built and he stocked the Lake of Agrippa with exotic birds and animals.

This clearly reflects how much Nero wanted to get Rome out of what was usual and conventional in architecture during his era. He also used architectural ideas in surpassing the building programs emperors prior to him had done, thus establishing a tradition that seeks to ameliorate the city of Rome.

But the possibility that Nero used his building programs as propaganda could not be easily neglected. Many ancient Roman emperors used different methods such as building monuments, temples, buildings and using coinage to make them well-remembered by the people. In the process, he became increasingly lavish to the point that he was rumored to demand money and to almost use up the Roman treasury while reconstructing the city after the Great Fire. But analyzing the history of Rome since its foundation, it can be concluded that Neros actions at first were hardly outrageous, for it was established that one of the roles of the emperor was to build imperial palaces, temples, and public buildings. The extravagance that Nero had shown with his building programs was a natural emulation of Julia-Claudian tradition  (Elsner 121).

It had probably only been overboard when Nero insisted on the construction of many architectural structures like an artificial lake which was said to be like a sea which did not really meet the needs of the people, but were just created for the sole purpose of luxury.

In addition to that, Nero also restored temples an example worth noting is his alleged restoration of the Temple of Vesta standing at the eastern end of the Roman Forum next to the Sacred Way at the foot of the Palatine. It was said that Nero received warning from Vesta not to pursue his plan to travel to Egypt prior to the occurrence of the Great Fire. Thus, Nero did not continue his trip. The Temple of Vesta was considered sacred by Romans because it served as a symbol of the safety and survival of the empire. Unsurprisingly, after the destruction of the temple during the fire, Nero immediately ordered its restoration to assure the public that the building had been restored implying that the city as well is safe. Moreover, he also had the House of the Vestal Virgins rebuilt and improved, placing it adjacent to the Sacred Way which leads to his Golden House.

Nero, despite the presence of several ancient writings condemning him for his actions as an emperor, undoubtedly brought Roman architecture to its next phase with his extravagant and splendid architectural designs. It may be true that the way he lived his private life, having admittedly killed his own mother and being rumored to be engaged in debauchery, was not a model of a highly moral life. But it had hardly anything to do with his contributions to the architectural designs through his building programs.

On the other hand, Vespasian, Neros successor, was left with the difficult situation Nero left during the last years of his reign. After Nero left the throne in AD 69, the burden of having to continue the unfinished restoration of Rome due to the destruction caused by the Great Fire was left to Vespasian. And there were still many public establishments that were not completely restored and there were still some in which restoration was not started.

Some of these were the two wooden amphitheaters in Campus Martius, the older smaller one of Statilius Taurus and the splendidly decorated more modern structure of Nero near the Siesta Julia. During that time, only the Circus Maximus was left as venue in the capital. So, Vespasian started the construction of the first amphitheater in Rome that was made of stone. The lake, used to be a part of the Golden House, was drained and at that exactly same site, a gigantic amphitheater was built.

Vespasian, in this act of building a humongous amphitheater made of stone which had not been done prior to that, reflected his practicality for the obvious reason that an amphitheater, though will take a longer time to build which indeed happened because Vespasians reign already ended before this ambitious construction of a giant amphitheater, will last for a longer time and would not be easily ruined by fire. Based on the descriptions of its design, the amphitheater showed excellence both in design and usefulness.

The structure has a travertine facade that superimposes three arcades framed by half-columns, Tuscan, ionic and Corinthia, the second and the third arcades framed by half-columns , successively Tird orders on pedestals. Also on pedestals Corinthin pilasters on high sub-plinths divide the attic into bays that alternated windows with the great bronze shields and windows, travertine brackets supported masts that carried the uelarium, an awning that protected the heads of spectators from the cruel summer sun. In the interior, five tiers of seats framed the spacious arena. Sloping toward the arena, these were supported on raking barrel vaults attached in turn to horizontal barrel vaults over the four corridors that encircled the building on the ground floor. The second and third levels had two such corridors, the fourth, and one. And the stairs from these corridors led up to the seats.

Aside from the construction of the huge amphitheater, Vespasian gained the support of the Roman populace by building programs and using a method unlike Neros. He was able to please the people under his leadership and gain popular support having succeeded Nero who was considered as the best builder in the history of ancient Rome since Augustus, it was difficult for him to surpass Neros architectural feat, especially with the burden of restoring the city in hand. But Vespasians style of leadership was effective. Being the first emperor under Flavian dynasty, his need of pleasing the public was excessively high. Nonetheless, he did the right move when he immediately had the Temple of Jupiter optimus Maximus restored, and this is to emphasize the restoration of religious and civil order in Rome. Through this, he had gained the trust of the Roman inhabitants.

Another basis of Vespasians building program was his awareness of the need to construct a temple where military achievements could be celebrated. Thus, he had built the Temple of Peace, as a reminder of peace for the Romans, on the lot previously occupied by the Macellum. According to evidence, the Temple of peace was a high fire wall of massive, externally rusticated, pepperino and travertine blocks, crowned by a simple travertine cornice, protected the interior. Within the colonnade on the south, east, and west sides of the central plaza had white marble steps, a Corinthian order with red granite shafts and a white marble interior pavement. In bays framed by pilasters that corresponded to the columns on the facade, and tabernacles visually enlivened the back walls.

Aside from the Temple of Peace, it can be considered as Vespasians greatest architectural feat. According to Carlos Norena, it was Vespasians way of being associated with Augustus who was known to be an efficient emperor (Norena). He also constructed the Temple of the Capitoline Triad. With the construction of a huge amphitheater and the Temple of Peace which can be seen as built for the benefit of the Roman populace, Vespasian continued to gain increasing support. And it is not surprising when Vespasian was deified after his reign, whereas his predecessor, Nero was condemned. Despite the fact that Nero had largely contributed to Roman architecture, his leadership was tarnished because of reckless actions he had done.

While Vespasian showed through his building programs that he was conventional and traditional, most of his policies and construction plans were in accordance with the tradition of Flavian dynasty. His constructions imply that he was less daring with the building of imperial palaces, temples and other public buildings but Vespasian deserved to be praised for he considered the needs and the wants of his populace before beginning a construction. Most of his works were well praised due to their utilitarian and conservative nature, which were both well liked in the moral rhetoric of Rome for he was able to restore balance and counteract the increasingly lavish building programs adopted by Nero. Thus, unsurprisingly, he was deified during the reign of his successor Titus.

Vespasian, having considered the current situation of Rome during his reign, did the right move when he opted to be rational and conservative, rather than emulate the extravagance which marked the leadership of his predecessor Nero. With this, it can be concluded that Vespasian is a model of an efficient emperor when he considered spending the little budget left in the Roman treasury when Nero stepped out with constructing public buildings that were mostly needed by the populace during his time. Indeed, he put the needs of his people first. He is clearly not as prolific builder as Nero was but he had shown leadership worthy of admiration with the moderation shown in his building programs which did not show designs grander than Neros buildings but indeed focus more on the utilitarian nature of the buildings.

Thus, both emperors clearly had skills as builders though Nero brought more developments in Roman architecture with his fancy and complex designs, some of the innovations he introduced may be unwelcomed by some but indeed Nero brought art a step further and opened its door to many possibilities art can achieve when he surpassed the tradition of an excessively luxurious imperial palaces which were common in Julio-Claudian dysnasty. Thus, his architectural tastes significantly influenced Roman architecture.

The differences between the building programs Nero and Vespasian had may have rooted from the fact that they came from two different dynasties. Julio-Claudian, where Nero came from, was noted for its extravagance, whereas Flavian dynasty was known to criticize the ways of those who are under Julio-Claudian dynasty and who opted to be conventional by their standards as prioritizing the needs rather than to go after pleasure. These differences were clearly reflected in their construction programs.