Architecture Final Draft

Romanesque and Gothic Architecture

The churches in each society were the best way to see a great example of Romanesque or Gothic design. They were the most important building in the area because Christianity had really taken over. The theology of the centuries that each style was in had a great impact on the final results and the making of the buildings. The churches changed tremendously from the Romanesque buildings in the 9^th, 10^th, and 11^th centuries to the Gothic churches in the 12^th, 13^th, and 14^th centuries. The Romanesque buildings were very fortified and dark for protection, whereas the Gothic buildings were open to the light and intricately designed to feel the power of God.

The Romanesque buildings had a different motive than the Gothic buildings which creates a huge distinction between the two. Romanesque churches had small windows for their fortification (see figure 2). Because the buildings wanted to be so protected, they had a minimum amount of windows. Also, they were small and sometimes had bars in front of them. Not only were there few windows, but there was not many entrances either. The people did whatever they could to defend themselves from any barbarians planning an attack. Gothic windows were large and sophisticated to let plenty of light in (see figure 5). This building has almost all the walls covered in stained glass. The theology was that the church needed to have big windows to let in all the light from God. Everything revolved around having the presence of God’s light to guide them. The stained-glass was colorful and had pictures of important people or just designs in general. The Gothic windows were much more attractive.

Romanesque and Gothic buildings differed in their internal style too. The Romanesque churches were not very elegant, just strong and sturdy (see figure 3). Huge columns supported the building, but they were mostly plain. Because the church had to be so sturdy, they could not put as much design into them. Arches were located all through-out the building in areas such as windows, above doors, or between arches. All of the arches were curved or rounded at the top. The Gothic churches had designs and art everywhere (see figure 6). The columns, walls, and ceilings all had carved pictures or art. The stained- glass windows added elegance because they were so delicately made with numerous colors. A distinct difference from the Romanesque buildings was that the Gothic buildings had a pointed arch at the top instead of the rounded Romanesque ones. Romanesque buildings wanted protection whereas Gothic buildings wanted beauty.

The most important difference between the two different styles was the make-up of the building. Romanesque churches were built with very thick and strong materials (see figure 1).  They had huge, bulky columns and the walls were made from heavy materials. Also, there were large towers used for lookout or to ring a bell for everybody to hear. The Romanesque buildings were built like this for a very specific reason. Their theology was that they needed to be protected from all barbarians if there was going to be an attack. Because the church was the center of the peoples’ lives, it was the place they could go for protection during this period. Gothic buildings were very opposite. The walls were thin and the church itself was not as wide (see figure 4). The walls had intricate designs and everything was elegant. The people believed the building should look sophisticated because they wanted to attract the light of God. There was huge stained-glass windows with beautiful art painted into them. During this time, protection was not what they wanted, but a great admirable building was chosen.

Even though both Romanesque and Gothic buildings were designed very differently, both were developed from their theology from the time period. The people believed something and that is how they created their buildings. Romanesque churches may not have been as attractive, but they were thick and sturdy to keep out any barbarians. Gothic buildings were not about fortification, but elegance and letting in all of God’s light with the artistic stained-glass windows. The theology of each style was almost opposite, but it is what affected the style of the center of their lives, the church.

Figure 1:

Abazia di San Vittore (Genga), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abaziasanvittorefrasassi.jpg, photograph taken in 2007.

Figure 2:

English:Castle Rising Castle, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Castle-rising-castle.JPG, photograph taken in 2008.

Figure 3:

Side aisle and gallery of the cathedral of Santiago de Compostela, Spain, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SantCompostela21.jpg, photograph taken in 2006.

Figure 4:

Cathedral of Reims, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Reims_Kathedrale.jpg, photograph taken in 2006

Figure 5:

Sainte Chapelle - Upper Chapel, Paris, France, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sainte_chapelle_-_Upper_level.jpg photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 6:

King's College Chapel, Cambridge, England, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F%C3%A4chergew%C3%B6lbe_KingsCollege.jpg, photograph taken in 2007

Architecture Rough Draft

Romanesque and Gothic Architecture

The churches in each society were the best way to see a great example of Romanesque or Gothic design. They were the most important building in the area because Christianity had really taken over. The Romanesque buildings were very fortified and dark, whereas the Gothic buildings were open to the light and much thinner walled. This is what the people believed was needed for the churches.  Even though Romanesque and Gothic churches were very different, they had one huge similarity. Both architectural designs were based off of the theology at the time period. The Romanesque and Gothic architecture had nothing to do with the theology of the time period or what people thought was right for the buildings.

The Romanesque buildings had a different motive than the Gothic buildings which creates a huge distinction between the two. Romanesque churches had small windows for their fortification (see figure 2). Because the buildings wanted to be so protected, they had a minimum amount of windows. Also, they were small and sometimes had bars in front of them. Not only were there few windows, but there weren’t many entrances either. The people did whatever they could to defend themselves from any barbarians planning an attack. Gothic windows were large and sophisticated to let plenty of light (see figure 5). This building has almost all the walls covered in stained glass. The theology was that the church needed to have big windows to let in all the light from God. Everything revolved around having the presence of God’s light to guide them. The stained-glass was colorful and had pictures of important people or just designs in general. The Gothic windows were much more attractive.

Romanesque and Gothic buildings differed in their internal style too. The Romanesque churches were not very elegant, just strong and sturdy (see figure 3). The columns were thick to support the building, but they were mostly plain. Because the church had to be so sturdy, they could not put as much design into them. Arches were located all through-out the building in areas such as windows, above doors, or between arches. All of the arches were curved or rounded at the top. The Gothic churches had designs and art everywhere (see figure 6). The columns, walls, and ceilings all had carved pictures or art. The stained- glass windows added elegance because they were so delicately made with numerous colors. A distinct difference from the Romanesque buildings was that the Gothic buildings had a pointed arch at the top instead of the rounded Romanesque ones. Romanesque buildings wanted protection whereas Gothic buildings wanted beauty.

The most important difference between the two different styles was the make-up of the building. Romanesque churches were built with very thick and strong materials (see figure 1).  They had huge, bulky columns and the walls were made from heavy materials. Also, there were large towers used for lookout or to ring a bell for everybody to hear. The Romanesque buildings were built like this for a very specific reason. Their theology was that they needed to be protected from all barbarians if there was going to be an attack. Because the church was the center of the peoples’ lives, it was the place they could go for protection during this period. Gothic buildings were very opposite. The walls were thin and the church itself was not as wide (see figure 4). The walls had intricate designs and everything was elegant. The people believed the building should look sophisticated because they wanted to attract the light of God. There was huge stained-glass windows with beautiful art painted into them. During this time, protection was not what they wanted, but a great admirable building was chosen.

Even though both Romanesque and Gothic buildings were designed very differently, both were developed from their theology from the time period. The people believed something and that’s how they created their buildings and churches. Romanesque buildings may not have been as attractive, but they were thick and sturdy to keep out any barbarians. Gothic buildings were not about fortification, but elegance and letting in all of God’s light with the artistic stained-glass windows. The theology of each style was almost opposite, but it is what affected the style of the center of their lives, the church.

Figure 1:

Abazia di San Vittore (Genga), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Abaziasanvittorefrasassi.jpg, photograph taken in 2007.

Figure 2:

English:Castle Rising Castle, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Castle-rising-castle.JPG, photograph taken in 2008.

Figure 3:

Side aisle and gallery of the cathedral of Santiago de Compostela, Spain, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:SantCompostela21.jpg, photograph taken in 2006.

Figure 4:

Cathedral of Reims, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Reims_Kathedrale.jpg, photograph taken in 2006

Figure 5:

Sainte Chapelle - Upper Chapel, Paris, France, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sainte_chapelle_-_Upper_level.jpg photograph taken in 2009.

Figure 6:

King's College Chapel, Cambridge, England, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:F%C3%A4chergew%C3%B6lbe_KingsCollege.jpg, photograph taken in 2007

Roman Empire: Final Draft

The Roman Empire

                At one point, the Roman Empire was very powerful. It was leading the whole western part of the world and had such a strong government. As soon as there was just a few bad people in office, things started going down-hill. The Era of the Soldiers was one of the worst times for the Roman Empire because of the selfish people. Also, barbaric attacks could not be stopped by Constantine, and the empire had separated. Sometimes, when something gets too strong, it can take a nose dive and be gone in a flash. There were many events that affected Rome in a negative way; eventually they all built up to the decline of the Roman Empire.

                Rome diminished itself with all of the internal problems it had. There were too many people fighting for power on one side, and then the other side was the plebeians fighting for more equality. The plebeians always thought that they were not being treated fairly and this caused an uprising. The patricians had the ability to make more decisions, have a bigger say in the empire, and easily over power the plebeians. BBC History said, “The system was weighted to give more influence to the votes of the wealthy” (Beard). Patricians always had the better end of situations in the empire and the plebeians were easily outspoken. This created much controversy among the people and did not help the Roman Empire at all. The people in the empire were fighting a lot of the time.

The Roman Empire was so strong for such a long time because they had smart people in power. In the last few hundred years of rulers, there were some crazy people in office. Two brothers, named Caracalla and Gaeta, were amongst the worst, especially because they are what led the Roman Empire into a disastrous age of rulers called the Era of the Soldiers. This was 100 years of horrible leaders all fighting for power. Christopher Lightfoot said, “Almost all, having taking power upon the murder of the preceding emperor, came to a premature and violent end” (Lightfoot). There were 37 different people in power and out of this number, 25 of them were assassinated.  Because everyone was fighting for power, they were removed very quickly. This all weakened the Roman Empire even more.

Once Constantine became emperor, things began to get better for a while. During his reign, there began to be a change. He named the city Constantinople after himself, and it was the new center of the empire. Rome was fading away and changing into Eastern and Western Europe. Constantine was struggling to hold it all together because barbarians had started to continuously attack and it kept on getting worse. “What began as a controlled resettlement of barbarians within the empire’s borders ended as an invasion” (Lightfoot). Different cultures were bombarding the empire from all directions. The Western part of the empire had been taken over. Constantine was able to hold on to the Eastern side, but it evolved into what was called the Byzantine Empire. Because the city of Rome was actually located in Western Europe, it had definitely fallen.

                In the last years of Rome’s Empire, there was way too much turbulence to keep things stable. The main thing that caused Rome’s decline was the struggle and fighting for the correct and intelligible person to lead the whole empire. The Era of the Soldiers was such a long period of negative incidents that it was too hard to fix and led to more disaster. Even some of the best emperors, such as Constantine, could not sustain the barbarian’s threats and the empire could not stay in sync. The Roman Empire had truly fallen once it split into Eastern and Western Europe, then the Western fraction had been clearly taken over by someone else.

Works Cited:

·         Beard, Mary. "BBC - History - The Fall of the Roman Republic." BBC - Homepage. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Apr. 2011. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/

·         Lightfoot, Christopher. "The Roman Empire (27 B.C.–393 A.D.) | Thematic Essay | Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History | The Metropolitan Museum of Art." The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York: metmuseum.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Apr. 2011. <http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/roem/hd_roem.htm>

Rough Draft: April 12

The Roman Empire

                At one point, the Roman Empire was very powerful. It was leading the whole western part of the world and had such a strong government. As soon as there was just a few bad people in office, things started going down-hill. The Era of the Soldiers was one of the worst times for the Roman Empire. Sometimes, when something gets too strong, it can take a nose dive and ruin it all. There were many events that affected Rome in a negative way, eventually, they all built up to the decline of the Roman Empire. Rome didn't fall, it just changed into something different.

                When Caracalla and Geta, sons of Septimius Severus, were in power, things were very bad. The two brothers had a strong dislike for each other and their rule consisted of many fights between the brothers. Caracalla had ordered a “damnatio memoriae” on Geta. This meant everything with Geta’s name, face, or anything representing him was erased. After that, Caracalla got Geta assassinated, which led to his own assassination. This stirred up the Romans and there were many disputes among the people. When the leaders of the country are causing more trouble in the people, there is going to be a big problem.

                Once the two brothers were out of office, there was no one else to take over. This is what led to the Era of the Soldiers, a 100 year time period of horrible leaders all fighting for power. During this time period, there were 37 different people in power. Out of this number, 25 of them were assassinated. Some people served in office for as little as three weeks! Knowing this, the people in office were not smart, powerful, or well-liked among the people which caused the short ruling period. This also didn’t help Rome at all. Rome was just becoming less and less powerful during all of this commotion and the people doubted their own empire on a greater scale.

                After the Era of the Soldiers, Diocletian came into leading Rome. He actually had some good plans, but they didn’t work out properly. Diocletian developed the tetrarchy. This was a system of four leaders. There were two people that were the highest in power, and then the other two were below them, but still in office. This is similar to a president and vice president role. This did not follow through because there were too many people fighting for the highest rank in power. Soon after that, Diocletian was not in power any more, but Constantine was. After winning a huge battle, he freely accepted Christianity in Rome. Constantine also founded the city called Constantinople. This ended up being the new center of the “Roman” empire. This is when Rome started really fading away because now the Roman Empire was divided into Eastern Europe, also known as Byzantine, and Western Europe. Rome was still there, but the Roman Empire was not. Rome was now just a place in Italy. It wasn’t ruling the whole Mediterranean Sea and it wasn’t the most powerful.

                In the last years of Rome’s Empire, there was way too much turbulence to even keep things going. The main thing that caused Rome’s decline was the struggle and fighting for the correct and intelligible person to lead the whole empire. The Era of the Soldiers was such a long period of negative incidents that it was too hard to fix. In the long run, it was probably a good thing that the Roman Empire fell so the rest of the world could expand and widen the many cultures.

Bibliography:

·         "Rome.info > Fall of the Roman Empire, decline of ancient Rome." Rome.info > Rome tourist information, Ancient Rome travel guide. Version 2003-2009. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2011. <http://www.rome.info/history/e

·         century, the late 3rd, and the city of Rome. "Decline of the Roman Empire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia." Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Apr. 2011. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De

Daily Question: 4/6/11

Required Daily: How does Early Christian and Byzantine portraiture represent both a continuation of and a break from the past? Look up the Fayum Portraits and the Ravenna Portrait of Justinian as a starting point for your thinking.


    The Early Christian and Byzantine portraiture represents both a continuation of and a break from the past. The continuation from the past is there because many of the Early Christian and Byzantine portraits show the people in the pictures doing stuff they accomplished or that was important. In earlier times, there were paintings drawn in caves that portrayed hunts. This is representing some of the people's best hunts or maybe the winner of the hunts. In the first picture below, there are people doing something that was probably pretty important to Early Christians because it was good enough to be made into a huge carving. In Byzantine portraiture, (second picture from bottom), you can see that a portrait of one person is about the same as earlier portraits. For example, they depict a single person, usually rather important, facing forward. There is a break from the past in a couple of ways too. In some of the portraiture from the Early Christians and Byzantine's, the images have much more detail and are sometimes created a different way because there has been better materials discovered. The third picture down is a mosaic, these pictures had to have taken a long and tedious time because of all the placement of the tiles or glass pieces. Also, the picture directly below is very precise and has much detail in all of the people. The continuation and breaks in the older portraiture to the newer is a good thing. It helps the world and culture develop even more. 

http://artandseek.net/files/2007/12/ivory-with-pilate.jpg

http://prestwidge.com/horizon/horizon5-8.jpg

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ikon/athos10.gif

Stoicism

Stoicism is an important personality trait that many people could benefit from having. People that display this trait come across as very brave and mature. "Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will...” Even though Seneca is about to die, he keeps himself calm and collected. Stoicism is the ability to endure pain and hardship while retaining the ability to control ones emotions; Seneca, at his death, was a perfect example of a stoic.

Seneca portrays the quality of being stoic in many different instances. The Internet Ancient History Sourcebook said, "Seneca, as his aged frame, attenuated by frugal diet, allowed the blood to escape but slowly, severed also the veins of his legs and knees.” Seneca “allows” the blood to escape slowly because he uses his stoicisms which lets him endure the pain and hardship of dying. Most people would not face death in such a way. Seneca does not let his emotions take over himself and he just works through the kinks. “Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will…” (Internet Ancient History Sourcebook). Knowing he was about to be killed, he doesn’t scream and fight the people, but he simply just asks for a tablet so he can write his will. Seneca was “unmoved” by his fate. He calmly sat there taking everything in.

Seneca was a friend of the emperor Nero, and he helped him in numerous ways. Seneca was widely known and was rather wealthy. “When even in the height of his wealth and power he was thinking of his life's close." (Internet Ancient History Sourcebook). Even though Seneca was rich and prosperous, he knew he would have to die someday. Being killed wasn’t something he wanted, but it was what was going to happen and he calmly accepted it. Seneca did not show his pleasure in his wealth either. He had something so great and he surprisingly received his death penalty with no fear. Seneca showed no concern to this great burden because he was a stoic. He did not grant himself the power to just break out crying over his death.

Seneca even used his stoicism to help others in a way. “Having spoken these and like words, meant, so to say, for all, he embraced his wife; then softening awhile from the stern resolution of the hour, he begged and implored her to spare herself the burden of perpetual sorrow, and, in the contemplation of a life virtuously spent, to endure a husband's loss with honorable consolations.” (Internet Ancient History Sourcebook). Seneca was about to be put to death and his wife wanted to be too because he would be gone. Seneca did not allow this to happen because he cared for other people even when he was about to die. He showed his affection towards his wife and did not let this deep pain get the best of himself.  Seneca’s stoicism helped him in this great unfortunate event.

Even in the hardest of times, Seneca showed his Stoicism. Not only did he act unconcerned at the statement of his death, but he also watched over and cared for others even in the harshest moments. Seneca's stoicism probably made him a more likable person to be around, and he also benefited from it because he did not get all worked up over the many joyful or negative events that he encountered in his lifetime. 

Halsall , Paul. "Internet Ancient History Sourcebook: Late Antiquity." Fordham EDU. Web. 5 Apr. 2011. <http://www.fordham.edu/halsal

Class work

Stoicism is an important personality trait that many people could benefit from having. People that display this trait come across as very brave and mature. "Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will...” Even though Seneca is about to die, he keeps himself calm and collected. Stoicism is the ability to endure pain and hardship while retaining the ability to control ones emotions; Seneca, at his death, was a perfect example of a stoic.

Seneca portrays the quality of being stoic in many different instances. The Internet Ancient History Sourcebook said, "Seneca, as his aged frame, attenuated by frugal diet, allowed the blood to escape but slowly, severed also the veins of his legs and knees.” Seneca “allows” the blood to escape slowly because he uses his stoicisms which lets him endure the pain and hardship of dying. Most people would not face death in such a way. Seneca does not let his emotions take over himself and he just works through the kinks. “Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will…” (Internet Ancient History Sourcebook). Knowing he was about to be killed, he doesn’t scream and fight the people, but he simply just asks for a tablet so he can write his will. Seneca was “unmoved” by his fate. He calmly sat there taking everything in.

Seneca was a friend of the emperor Nero, and he helped him in numerous ways. Seneca was widely known and was rather wealthy. “When even in the height of his wealth and power he was thinking of his life's close." (Internet Ancient History Sourcebook). Even though Seneca was rich and prosperous, he knew he would have to die someday. Being killed wasn’t something he wanted, but it was what was going to happen and he calmly accepted it. Seneca showed no concern to this great burden.

Seneca even used his stoicism to help others in a way. “Having spoken these and like words, meant, so to say, for all, he embraced his wife; then softening awhile from the stern resolution of the hour, he begged and implored her to spare herself the burden of perpetual sorrow, and, in the contemplation of a life virtuously spent, to endure a husband's loss with honorable consolations.” (Internet Ancient History Sourcebook). Seneca was about to be put to death and his wife wanted to be too because he would be gone. Seneca did not allow this to happen because he cared for other people even when he was about to die. He showed his affection towards his wife and did not let this deep pain over rule his emotions. Seneca’s stoicism helped him in this great unfortunate event.

Even in the hardest of times, Seneca showed his Stoicism.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/asbook10.html

Daily Question: 4/4/11

Required Daily: Read Tacitus' description of the Death of Seneca and Book One of M. Aurelius' Meditations. Find quotes within those two texts that help explain what Stoicism is all about.

•  "Upon this the tribune asserted that he saw no signs of fear, and perceived no sadness in his words or in his looks."
• "Seneca, quite unmoved, asked for tablets on which to inscribe his will..."
• "Seneca, as his aged frame, attenuated by frugal diet, allowed the blood to escape but slowly, severed also the veins of his legs and knees."
• "when even in the height of his wealth and power he was thinking of his life's close."
• "From my grandfather Verus I learned good morals and the government of my temper."
• "From the reputation and remembrance of my father, modesty and a manly character"
• "I learned endurance of labour, and to want little, and to work with my own hands, and not to meddle with other people's affairs, and not to be ready to listen to slander."
• "to be always the same, in sharp pains, on the occasion of the loss of a child, and in long illness; and to see clearly in a living example that the same man can be both most resolute and yielding, and not peevish in giving his instruction; and to have had before my eyes a man who clearly considered his experience and his skill in expounding philosophical principles as the smallest of his merits; and from him I learned how to receive from friends what are esteemed favours, without being either humbled by them or letting them pass unnoticed"
• "I learned self-government, and not to be led aside by anything; and cheerfulness in all circumstances, as well as in illness"

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/tacitus-ann15a.html

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/tacitus-ann15a.html