Exploring Iconic Ancient Structures: Parthenon, Doryphoros, and More
The Parthenon
The work that we will discuss this week is the Parthenon in Athens. The main temple, the Parthenon, located on the Acropolis, was used to house the chryselephantine statue of Athena Parthenos. It was built by Callicrates under Ictinus and monitored by Phidias between 447-432 BC during the “Golden Age” of Athens under the rule of Pericles. This temple was part of the reconstruction of the Acropolis after it was destroyed by the Persians during the Wars of Medes and is the leading exponent of Greek Classicism in the 5th century BC. We are witnessing a religious work of the first order, as it is the main temple of Athens, which was to house the statue of the goddess Athena Parthenos, the patron goddess of the city. This temple was built using Pentelic marble and features Doric elements (columns devoid of bases, 20 flutes on the shafts, capitals, and an abacus consisting of horses and an architrave divided into triglyphs and metopes). Although today it highlights the whiteness of its marble, it is erroneously believed that it was originally polychrome, with colors that emphasized strong architectural elements. We are facing a temple of regular proportions, being twice as long as it is wide, with eight columns on its shorter sides, categorizing it as an octastyle temple with 17 columns on its longer sides. The columns run along its four sides, making it a peripteral temple, with six columns preceding the pronaos. From the pronaos, we access the cella, which is divided into three naves with superimposed columns to gain the height needed to house the 12-foot statue of the goddess. In its later phase, cut off from the rest, there is another chamber called the opisthodomos, which served to house the treasure of the goddess. This work reflects not only the Doric Order, the most austere and classical of the Greek orders, but also the harmonic proportions that Greek temples must pursue. The proportions include not only elements but also their optical corrections made by architects to achieve that perfect vision of the set (avoiding uneven intercolumniations, bulging of the stylobate, and entablature to avoid a sinking feeling in the center, slight tilt of shafts, etc.). The Parthenon was famous in ancient times not only for its slender proportions but also for its sculptural decoration, the work of sculptor Phidias, now primarily divided between the Louvre and the British Museum. The work that we have discussed marked a milestone in the history of architecture, creating a type of temple that was to be copied repeatedly, not only in the ancient world but also more recently during the 19th-century Neoclassicism. While it maintained its religious purposes for nearly a thousand years, transitioning from a pagan temple to a mosque, and later to the first Christian church, fate would have it that a Venetian bomb exploded in the Parthenon, which had been converted by the Turks into a powder magazine, destroying much of its structure. Additionally, in the 19th century, European imperialist powers looted the church of most of its sculptural decoration, which is now divided between Paris and, crucially, London.
Doryphoros
Author: Polykleitos. This sculpture is one of the most representative works of the Classical period of Greek art (5th-4th centuries BC), a period characterized by socio-political tensions between democratic and aristocratic forms of government. Artistically, this tension was seen with a progressive evolution towards naturalism. The original work was created in the middle of the 5th century BC (440-430 BC), but the work we are analyzing is a later copy made in Hellenistic times. We encounter a sculpture in the round or free-standing, made in marble, although the original was bronze. It depicts a young man, naked, in the act of moving forward with the left arm flexed as he carries a spear that has been lost. The subject has different interpretations; it can be considered to represent an athlete (a javelin thrower) or a work of mythological and heroic themes representing Achilles. The truth is that the subject is just an excuse to capture the sculptor’s ideal of male beauty presented in his “Canon.” This work is the purest embodiment of the prototype of the perfect male body, with austere elegance, devoid of Herculean forms or mannerisms. Quiet, confident movements provide an interesting solution to the figures standing at rest: one leg supports the weight of the body while the other barely touches the floor with the toes, flexing the knee by pulling back. The tension generated by this imbalance is offset by a slight tilt in the pelvis and shoulders. The Doryphoros still retains some archaic remnants; it is carved roughly, the pectorals are flat, and the waist and hip lines are very noticeable. It introduces the technique of gravity on one leg. It represents the attitude of advancing Doryphoros, a momentary pause that joins stability with a sense of movement. Its action is much less forceful than that of the Discus Thrower of Myron, but the torso fully responds to it. The Doryphoros holds the spear in the left hand (our right), straining his left shoulder and lifting it slightly. The left leg cannot bear any weight and falls, while the hip rises, and the torso expands. The Doryphoros’ right arm hangs relaxed, the shoulder dropped. The right leg supports the weight, and the hip is lifted. The torso from the hip and the arm is retracted. The contrast between one side of the torso contracted and the other spread gives the body a very different dynamic balance compared to the static symmetry of kuroi, whose left and right sides are basically mirror images of each other. The alternating tense and relaxed members combined with a torso called contrapposto create a moldable form. This resource has been used many times throughout the history of art, as it is so effective in instilling a sense of vitality to figures made of stone, bronze, or painted. On the other hand, the tilt of the Doryphoros’ head to the right breaks the single point of view that characterized archaic sculptures. Both sides of the statue have very different qualities, but each one separately is harmonious and beautiful. The right side offers a feeling of rest thanks to the continuity of the vertical line that runs from the right leg supporting the weight to the arm in a relaxed position. The left side, by contrast, is angular, and the elbow position corresponds to the sharp bend of the left leg relaxed.
Although no conclusion has been reached on the proportions of the canon, it seems that the head is the seventh of the body, and the face is divided into three equal parts: the forehead, nose, and its distance from the chin. The thoracic arch and crease of the groin are arcs of the same circle, among other measures and proportions. For Polykleitos, beauty translates into beauty and proportion. The “Doryphoros” is the practical form of the theoretical principles formulated by Polykleitos, unfortunately lost in a book called precisely “Kanon.” It is often claimed that the forms of Doryphoros represent the highest aspiration of Greek sculptors, embodying the perfect proportion within a naturalistic ideal. This work was a new way of representing the human body, both in the representations of gods and those of humans, which became the fundamental motive of art developed by the Greeks in the classical period from the time of the Wars of Medes until the end of the reign of Alexander the Great (475 BC – 323 BC) – one of the most influential historical periods for the art world in particular and culture in general.
Discus Thrower
The work we will discuss is titled “Discus Thrower,” a marble copy of a bronze sculpture made by the Greek sculptor Myron, who lived and worked between 480 and 440 BC, one of the best representatives of Classical Greek sculpture. This work presents the peculiarity of being a copy made in marble of a bronze original that has not survived to this day. Therefore, it is difficult to know how faithfully the discussed work retains the original lost. The sculpture we are discussing is a round representation of an athlete at the moment of releasing the discus. The choice of this moment to represent the athlete, rather than the static Kuroi characteristic of the archaic period, shows the path taken by Greek sculpture towards greater movement. It captures a fleeting moment, which is a main characteristic of this sculptor, who primarily worked in bronze. This brings the athlete into a forward lean, raising the right arm that holds the discus to be cast while dropping the weight onto his right leg, delaying the left. This generates a zig-zag composition that extends from the right leg, which supports the weight of the body to the knee, creating another line to the hip, then to the hand, and finally to the head, which ends at the end of the right arm. On the other hand, the sculptor shows greater naturalism in the representation of anatomy, particularly in the depiction of the athlete’s tense muscles. The work that we discussed gained fame in antiquity, as evidenced by the different copies made in workshops around the first century BC. It is a clear example of the evolution of Greek sculpture. In contrast to the hieratic and flat shapes of Archaic sculpture, this work reflects a knowledge of anatomy by the sculptor, evident in the tension in the muscles of the athlete captured in the instant before the discus is released. However, Myron, who worked around the middle of the 5th century BC, still displays some archaic features, such as the fact that it is a front-facing work, the poorly developed hair sculpted on the head, and the lack of expressiveness in the face, which stands in clear contradiction to the tension in the body at a moment of maximum effort.
Myron is next to Polykleitos and Phidias, belonging to a later generation of sculptors representing the classical Greek period. However, his sculptures still exhibit certain aspects that have not changed and that will evolve in later generations of sculptors.
Coliseum
Built between AD 70 and 80 during the Flavian dynasty, the Colosseum is an example of high imperial Roman architecture. The construction of the Flavian Amphitheater began during the reign of Emperor Vespasian, who inaugurated it with the Flavian dynasty, and it ended the Julio-Claudian period. In an attempt to curry favor with the city of Rome and bury the dark years of his predecessor Nero’s reign, Vespasian decided to drain the lake that had been built in his Domus Aurea and construct a large amphitheater on the dried ground, worthy of the main city of the Empire. While the Romans adopted many of the buildings created by the Greeks, the amphitheater is a Roman original work created by merging two theaters, designed for combat between gladiators or between them and beasts, as well as public executions, which were bloody spectacles popular among the Roman people. The great work of the Colosseum, whose name comes from the colossal statue of Nero represented as Helios, was an example of Roman building capacity to construct huge structures. Constructed in blocks of travertine with concrete joints (opus caementicium), brick, and tufa stone, the building had extraordinary dimensions of 187 meters long by 155 wide and four stories high. The facade is organized around a story articulated in each order, with the first floor in classic Tuscan style, the second in Ionic, and the third in Corinthian. Equally novel is the joint use of the arch and the lintel. The fourth floor was a later extension during the time of Domitian and consists of a solid body with pilasters and brackets intended to support the wooden poles that set a huge awning or velarium to protect spectators from inclement weather. Through 80 arches called vomitoria, access and exit to the building occurred, allowing the evacuation of the structure, which could accommodate 50,000 spectators in minutes. Once inside, we see the first use of the vault, originating from the intersection of two barrel vaults. The grandstand was divided into different zones, named from the area closest to the sand to the top as ima, media, and summa cavea. Under the sand was built under Emperor Domitian, also known as the hypogeum, an extensive network of galleries and systems of cranes and pulleys designed to facilitate the shows that took place in the arena, allowing for the removal of animals, gladiators, or decorations. The Colosseum was inaugurated during the reign of Emperor Titus in 80 AD and lasted 100 days of inaugural performances, during which thousands of animals and people were slaughtered. From the time of its construction, the Colosseum became a symbol of the Roman Empire. It remained in use until gladiatorial shows were banned in the 5th century. In the succeeding centuries, the Colosseum became a quarry that supplied building materials to the buildings of Rome until 1749, when Pope Benedict XIV consecrated the building to the memory of Christian martyrs. Its architectural influence in later times, such as the Renaissance, was notable. In 1980, it was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
Alhambra
The work we will discuss is known as the “Court of the Lions,” perhaps the most famous part of the Alhambra in Granada, the last and most spectacular monument of Hispano-Islamic architecture in Spain. It was built between the 14th and 15th centuries by the Nasrid dynasty of Granada. The Court of the Lions, in particular, was constructed in the 15th century by Mohammed V. The work that we will discuss, the Court of the Lions, is part of a much broader set that includes the palaces or quarters of Comares and the Lions, as well as the citadel or fortress, which plays a clearly defensive role. The defensive function of the Alhambra palace is due to its location in the foothills of Sierra Nevada. Its name derives from the Arabic term “al-Qal’a al-Hamra” or “red fortress” because the exterior is notable for the red color of its stone and the simplicity of its forms, from which protrude the cubic forms of the towers, which do not presage the richly decorated interior. The Palace of the Lions, the last to be built, is attached to Comares and organized around a courtyard. This courtyard is modeled after a monastic cloister, appearing porticoed on all four sides with an abundance of fine shaft columns and many rings typically Nasrid, topped by very decorative cubic or stalactite capitals. On the shorter sides, two pavilions covered with gabled roofs stand out, highlighting the whole decorative motifs on gold drywall panels based on escudos and false angrelados, as well as stalactite arches and decorative tiling with geometric interlacing. In the center of the courtyard, a great fountain appears, supported by twelve lions, which share four rills connecting with four minor fountains located in the four main rooms of the palace. The symbolism, along with the abundance of trees and aromatic plants that decorated the patio, relates to the idea of Islamic paradise. On the long sides of the rooms known as the abecenrajes and the Two Sisters, both the richness of their decoration and their beautiful stalactite domes, built in plaster covering a lintel roof, stand out. On the shorter sides, successive rooms are connected by fake stalactite arches, with light coming from both the side of the palace and overhead light penetrating through the skylights above the gable roof, creating beautiful effects throughout the complex. Among these rooms stands the so-called “Hall of Kings” due to the pictorial decoration of the vault, where the kings of the Nasrid Dynasty appear (a rare example of figurative decoration in Islamic art).
We are undoubtedly witnessing the last and richest example of Islamic art in Spain. However, this palace, with rooms arranged around a central courtyard with fountains, canals, and plants, is not original but is now above examples such as the Palacio del Castillejo in Monteagudo, Murcia, from the Almoravid period (12th century).
Mosque of Cordoba
The work we will discuss is one of the parts of the Mosque of Cordoba. Specifically, in the picture, we can see the maxura of the mosque, which is the area before the mihrab reserved for the Caliph. We are thus faced with the most noble part of the mosque, which translates into the most richly decorated area. The maxura, next to the mihrab, is the result of expansions carried out under the reign of Al-Hakam II in the 11th century, along with successive modifications and extensions to the mosque that had been under construction since its first period under Abd-el-Rahman I in the 8th century. The first print of the image area tells of a noble, richly decorated space, as befits the most important area of the building. The materials used in its construction are simple, brick and stone, but it is then covered with different colored marbles and glass paste mosaics that enhance the overall vision. The construction system varies slightly from that used in the rest of the building, so that even using two levels, it remains high, with the first column and pillar on the second floor on thin columns attached. Also, even if overlapping arches occur throughout the mosque, the horseshoe arch is used on the second floor, while a lobed arch is resorted to, on whose keys new arcs begin. The colors of the segments of the prayer hall are replaced here by alternating smooth segments and decorated segments with decorative voussoirs ataurique. We see part of the mihrab, which itself was used for the Caliphate, featuring a horseshoe arch noted for its rich mosaic of colors, blue and gold, decorated with ataurique and epigraphic work by Byzantine craftsmen sent by the emperor. As the media have changed, even in this area, ribbed vaults are chosen instead of the lintel, creating a coffered ceiling distinct from the rest of the building. To this end, ribbed vaults are chosen, not crossing in the center, creating a star in its center that opens into a domed ceiling. The transition from square to polygonal space is achieved by small domes at the corners supported by arches called tubes. The vaults decorated with mosaics appear similar to the mihrab. The mihrab and maxura built by Al-Hakam II is the richest area of decorative and construction visible in the use of lobed arches, domes, and mosaics inspired by Byzantine art and the use of polychrome marble. Without a doubt, it was the perfect finale for a building that started in the time of Abd-el-Rahman I and had undergone successive expansions due to the growth of Cordoba, a city that was sophisticated and cultured, comparable to Constantinople and Baghdad. However, this would not be the final extension, as during the times of Hixam II, the leader Mansur wanted to expand the mosque. Seeing the impossibility of continuing the expansion of the building to the south, due to the proximity of the Guadalquivir River, he decided to expand eastward, resulting in the decentralization of the mihrab and maxura concerning the overall structure. This expansion did not reach the beauty and quality of the previous ones.
The Mosque of Cordoba is undoubtedly one of the most beautiful legacies left by the Muslim presence in Spain. The construction of a Gothic cathedral in its interior altered the vision of the entire structure, but it survived the destruction of similar premises, such as the mosque of Seville.