# The Roman Influence all over the world?



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

The Petit Trianon at Versailles certainly marks a beginning in the rise of neoclassicism in France. Although not totally devoid of the elements that mark the earlier styles of French Classicism, one can already appreciate the emergence of the new style in the complete absence of arches and in the cool severity of its style. 










Compare it with the "softer" and more ornate Grand Trianon not too far away.


----------



## cna (Oct 28, 2009)

However, the Roman continued, London is the true centre of the globe today - expressed, "The Star".


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

cna said:


> However, the Roman continued, London is the true centre of the globe today - expressed, "The Star".


I don't get what you mean here. 

For me, there is no true center of the globe (except the geologic center, I guess.) Certainly not in art and architecture.


----------



## cna (Oct 28, 2009)

tpe said:


> I don't get what you mean here.
> 
> For me, there is no true center of the globe (except the geologic center, I guess.) Certainly not in art and architecture.


The architecture is more interesting in London than Paris. It kills off the North and South and becoming the perfect. Rome is too old and Paris is simply not on the same tier, the way too French, that puts off the people globally. For me, it's Okay but London IS the centre of the culture and (information) technology. Stop using IKEA and try purchasing the expensive Victorian furnitures and never wanting the rubbish, breaking up the cheap glasses. The British Empire is truely the most advanced state out of the whole planet. My fingers crossed.


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

cna said:


> The architecture is more interesting in London than Paris. It kills off the North and South and becoming the perfect. Rome is too old and Paris is simply not on the same tier, the way too French, that puts off the people globally. For me, it's Okay but London IS the centre of the culture and (information) technology. Stop using IKEA and try purchasing the expensive Victorian furnitures and never wanting the rubbish, breaking up the cheap glasses. The British Empire is truely the most advanced state out of the whole planet. My fingers crossed.



Well, as far as art and architecture are concerned, I personally prefer Paris to London. Nothing wrong with your opinion, nonetheless. 

Victorian furniture is OK, but the true valuable English furniture is the furniture of the 18th century. Victorian furniture is simply not on the same league -- it is commonly too heavy and (at times, barbarically) ornate, lacking the true grace and finesse of the finest 18th century English workmanship. And the difference shows in the PRICE.

But I admit that I prefer French furniture of the 18th century -- and most of the people who go for these things will agree -- just look at the auctions at Christie's and Sotheby's and you will know.


----------



## vittorio tauber (Jul 30, 2008)

Frankly I believe Paris and London are so different from each other that I could never choose one out the two, since I can enjoy both for pretty different reasons.


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

vittorio tauber said:


> Frankly I believe Paris and London are so different from each other that I could never choose one out the two, since I can enjoy both for pretty different reasons.



I agree. It is a matter of personal preference.


----------



## Eddard Stark (Mar 31, 2008)

tpe said:


> But Palladio is of course very Veneto -- and not in keeping with the High Roman style of the period.
> 
> There is certainly a lot of Baroque scattered all around the globe -- the colonial churches of Spain and Portugal are proof of this.
> 
> But you misunderstand me. I meant the 2 designs for the Louvre -- Bernini's and Perrault's. Of the two, Perrault's proved to be the more influential.


Palladio is much before Baroque, or Perrault or neoclassicism. He lived in the IIH of XVI century, his style (while still unique) aligned with Manierism of his time.

Anyway going back to the topic Rome influenced in many many ways architecture:

1) domes and cupolas. From the Pantheon onwards, the most spectacular domes have been invented in Rome. Greeks surely did not invent it. Domes where a typical roman features thanks to their mastery of cement (which was re-discovered only much later)

2) Early christian church and basilicas - inspired to Ancient Roman buildings - from the late antiquity set the rules and the basics for all religious buildings of the - dark -years to come

3) High renaissance was born in Florence but moved to Rome. The sistine chapel, the papal loggias, the gardens are all marvels of a great time of renewal for the city

4) Baroque was truly invented in Rome, in Rome the greatest masters of the time (Bernini and Borromini) lived and worked. Counter-reformation churches had their staples in Rome

5) Rococò masterpiece like Trevi fountain and the Spanish steps set the tone of the century also in the 18th century, 

I shall say Rome had an impact on architecture no city can match. Has been the most important place of architecture in antiquity, in middle ages (bar the gothic period). Renaissance was imported from Florence but flourished there, Baroque was born there. Rococò had important works.


----------



## Eddard Stark (Mar 31, 2008)

Let's put some proves. 

Great ancient roman architecture: The pantheon (many thanks to Pincio...)



Pincio said:


> *PANTHEON*
> 
> Site of painter Raphael grave. Circular temple dedicated to "All the Gods", rebuilt by the emperor Hadrian c.AD 120. Transformed into the Christian church Sta Maria ad Martyres in the Middle Ages. Tombs of Raphael and Victor Emmanuel II.
> 
> ...


----------



## Eddard Stark (Mar 31, 2008)

High Renaissance: the sistine chapel



Pincio said:


> *THE SISTINE CHAPEL (VATICAN CITY)*
> 
> Where the cardinals are sealed during the mysterious ritual of conclave. The Sistine Chapel ceiling, painted by Michelangelo between 1508 and 1512, is one of the most renowned artworks of the High Renaissance.
> 
> ...


----------



## Eddard Stark (Mar 31, 2008)

Baroque: Piaza Navona and fontana dei 4 fiumi. The church is Borromini, the fountain is Bernini



Pincio said:


> *FOUNTAIN OF THE FOUR RIVERS*
> (Path of Illumination/Water)
> 
> In Bernini's fountain four male figures represent the main rivers of the four continents known back in the 17th Century: the Gange (Asia), Danube (Europe), Nile (Africa) and Rio de la Plata (Americas). An obelisk with dove atop stands tall over the fountain.
> ...


----------



## kimsmelling (Oct 30, 2009)

I am not against Paris or Stockholm actually, I've been to both and so called, typical globally friendly city...however, for any Londoners or Romans do not choose them, because they can make decent cooler judgement, taking Rome to Paris, Oslo to Stockholm, for instance. Take your short-sighted, thick glasses off, they are NOT anything more valuable than London is. There are just too many uneducated terrorist cultivating school leavers here! The Ma'am is crying, having such ideots like some of you here. What are these cities can offer more quality to London. You are completely retarded. In your language, you are some kind of brainless...aren't you silly boys/girls. If you are into the terrorism, I will teach you some lessons. After all, I have still got my task to finish up the devil worshippers that does not even exist, and delusion seekers. The Midgard does not exist in reality, you get me. Why are you trying to really make the one, the terrorists. That teaching is the way to the criminal. Have you got your head working, does not need to become the one. See what IRA does. Or Osama Bin Laden, Hitler, Stalin, whatever. That is you! This is NOT the middle age or stone age, any more. You cannot have a rifle and just kill people, that is illegal.


----------



## kimsmelling (Oct 30, 2009)

@Eddard Stark

Nice pics. I will also post some, if something struck into me.


----------



## Minato ku (Aug 9, 2005)

Please stop trolling, cna or kimsmelling as your newest account.
This thread is about the roman influence in the world architecture.


----------



## kimsmelling (Oct 30, 2009)

Let me clarify, I am not interested in the French or Swedish girls!

That is some nerd-tagetting. I never go to Paris or Stockholm ever again. Do not get me started some trashy long stories.

I am just a monkey never wears the glasses and not a gay.


----------



## kimsmelling (Oct 30, 2009)

This forum is actually weird. Is this anti-London forum or what, I am OK in London in reality, I am NOT the criminal himself. I've shown what he has done all the way through, so far. I can tell you who really is an ugly criminal and the most evil being on the whole planet, making this world all polluted and turned it into something which should not be. Do you know who that is. Not Germany, Italy, or Japan, but the criminal wannabes and invaders sealed as the war criminal. I am telling you that the Midgard does not exist, but that is you creating it. London is the most beautiful city on earth, that's the end of the story. London is not located in Sweden or Italy, but Britain. Keep it shining and independent out of Europe. For me, I am careless of your origin, but showed me something good, which is enough. I only dislike those who destroy the world worshipping something does not exist. The UK is NOT Midgard, stop making the prison! Stay who you are, Viking, Roman, Celts, whoever. But do not become the Hooligans. Nationalism is the ugliest thing in the whole world, some clueless gangsters. Now, all of you have become cultured, wealthy, turned into the human being. No fears but joy, all secured to be the perfectn and now goes back to the richest nation in the whole world. Or...do you want the silly peninsula stuffs instead, that just destroys this country. Silly, mental suicidal wish. Never let the Sunset happenes again.


----------



## socrates#1fan (Jul 1, 2008)

cna said:


> I wonder if any copies can beat the original. Some Romans might say that those copies are rubbish. For instance, they say that Veneto Street is better than Champs-Élysées. These are some of my favourite, sorry for my ignorance.
> 
> IMG]


It depends, Roman architecture is a common western heritage, but we are still going to change aspects of it, same way the Romans altered Greek architecture to their needs and desires.
However, I don’t think it makes it inferior.
Look at Washington DC, it is like stepping back to an ancient city (architecturally speaking) but there are influences of American taste that have changed things out of need, such as the US capitol, it is in classical style, but has Victorian influences on the exterior and interior, but this doesn’t make it inferior.

I live in a city (Indianapolis) that went through major building projects of monuments and so on, constructing a great deal of structures to mimic classical architecture, but like I said, there are differences.
People love classical architecture, and for those in the west, it is also part of our heritage, but people don’t want to constantly remake styles (though at times it is very pleasing).
A great deal of people like to stick to classical fashion, but naturally they are going to change things, but that doesn’t make it inferior, simply because it is just a changing of fashion, like the Romans did with the Greeks.


----------



## 15 (Oct 31, 2009)

I am not very keen on the Hellenic Architectures. I cannot see the point of spreading the doctrines over the East. I am just amazed of the Roman sense of beauty and knowledge built. The best of all - Spain and France are the mimics. And, Germany. . .is like Ketchup. The elegant Italian design is the highest quality of all, and very expensive. Italy is the way too hygenic and frosty. Look at the streets of Germany - full of dusts I can point out for ever. If Germany is perfect to your eyes, then probably need some medical treatment. It just makes me laugh.


----------



## Eddard Stark (Mar 31, 2008)

socrates#1fan said:


> It depends, Roman architecture is a common western heritage, but we are still going to change aspects of it, same way the Romans altered Greek architecture to their needs and desires.
> However, I don’t think it makes it inferior.
> Look at Washington DC, it is like stepping back to an ancient city (architecturally speaking) but there are influences of American taste that have changed things out of need, such as the US capitol, it is in classical style, but has Victorian influences on the exterior and interior, but this doesn’t make it inferior.
> 
> ...


Washington an ancient city architecturally speaking? It's as new-world as you can get with it's broad parks and alleys which were nonexistent in "ancient" cities. A few neoclassical building (which is not an ancient style) doesn't make it a little bit less american


----------



## socrates#1fan (Jul 1, 2008)

Eddard Stark said:


> Washington an ancient city architecturally speaking? It's as new-world as you can get with it's broad parks and alleys which were nonexistent in "ancient" cities. A few neoclassical building (which is not an ancient style) doesn't make it a little bit less american


That isn’t what I mean, the layout is far from Ancient, what I am talking about are the Monuments, government structures, etc almost all of theme are in styles that borrow heavily from ancient styles.
The Lincoln Memorial, Jefferson Memorial, Washington Monument, etc, all obviously borrow from ancient designs.


----------



## Eddard Stark (Mar 31, 2008)

socrates#1fan said:


> That isn’t what I mean, the layout is far from Ancient, what I am talking about are the Monuments, government structures, etc almost all of theme are in styles that borrow heavily from ancient styles.
> The Lincoln Memorial, Jefferson Memorial, Washington Monument, etc, all obviously borrow from ancient designs.


They actually don't.

They borrow from 18th century contemporary Neoclassical style which yes is loosely (let me stress again loosely) inspired on greek/roman architecture while being a very french/british affair. Actually is inspired on what 18th century men believed to be (from the ruins) the greek/roman (ie classical) style.

Now we know romans and greeks painted their temples of all colours, heavily decorating them. Far from being "minimilastic" as the Neoclassicals thought them to be they were "baroque", colourful and impressive

I hope I made myself clear

Anyway it's like saying that the british parliament (19th century) is a gothic building. It's loosely inspired to Gothic, but surely it is not


----------



## socrates#1fan (Jul 1, 2008)

Eddard Stark said:


> They actually don't.
> 
> They borrow from 18th century contemporary Neoclassical style which yes is loosely (let me stress again loosely) inspired on greek/roman architecture while being a very french/british affair. Actually is inspired on what 18th century men believed to be (from the ruins) the greek/roman (ie classical) style.


I wouldn’t say the Lincoln Memorial is loosely based on Greek/Roman architecture, but I could see that with the US Capitol and White House.


> Now we know romans and greeks painted their temples of all colours, heavily decorating them. Far from being "minimilastic" as the Neoclassicals thought them to be they were "baroque", colourful and impressive


Yes I’m aware of this, they did the same with statues.


> I hope I made myself clear


Indeed, thank you for the clarification.


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

Hello friends.  Sorry I missed a lot of action this weekend.

Well, one can probably say that Palladio is more aligned with the principles of Alberti, and one can argue that they are very different from the mainstream mannerist tradition that dominated Rome at the period leading to High Baroque.

Again, for some of you who might be too defensive: I don't think Rome and Italian architecture needs defending -- the glories of Roman and Italian architecture are obvious enough.

What I object to is the very *provincial* notion that all of French classical architecture is a poor imitation of Italian models. Nothing can be further from the truth. It smacks of jingoism and poor knowledge of the history and development of Architecture.


----------



## Philly Bud (Jun 8, 2009)

*What is "original" ... what is a "copy"?*

If this is not a country versus country thread, then it is certainly a style versus style thread. Its all very subjective and a matter of personal preference.

Myself, I am completely in agreement with tpe, who expressed his arguments in a cogent, informed, and erudite manner. I personally do NOT like Bernini's proposal for the Louvre and think the French design was far superior. That is my opinion.

The Romans borrowed very heavily from the Hellenistic Greeks. The Romans added their own innovations and inventions as well. 

I do not see Renaissance, Baroque, Neo-Classical, or any other kind of architecture as a "copy" or a "rip-off" of an earlier style ... it is not necessarily inferior to the earlier designs. On the contrary, I see architecture as an organic thing ... the later designs were often the more evolved, superior, with greater refinement and elegance. In my personal view, Sir Christopher Wren's Saint Paul's Cathedral in London is far more superb a building than the Pantheon in Rome. This is not to put the Pantheon down, it is a marvel of ancient engineering and a truly great building. Both have columned porticoes and domes. The Pantheon is much older and can be "alleged" to be the original, but Saint Paul's is much more complex and magnificent ... the I would argue the first is the crude "rough draft" and the latter structure was the _perfected_ and sublime realization of the idea of a domed structure with a columned portico.

...And these are MY views on the subject!

:soapbox:


----------



## Caravaggio (Oct 17, 2009)

With all do respect Philly Bud but Wren's St. Paul Cathedral is in my opinion an ugly building both form it's exterior and interior.


----------



## DeNeza401 (May 17, 2008)

MMMMNNNnnnn?????? Roman???????? I don't see much Roman architecture but Greeks updo's. However it seems that the US is madly in love with Roman architecture, if any.


----------



## vittorio tauber (Jul 30, 2008)

Philly Bud said:


> If this is not a country versus country thread, then it is certainly a style versus style thread. Its all very subjective and a matter of personal preference.
> 
> Myself, I am completely in agreement with tpe, who expressed his arguments in a cogent, informed, and erudite manner. I personally do NOT like Bernini's proposal for the Louvre and think the French design was far superior. That is my opinion.
> 
> ...


I see you point and agree to most of it.

However I think you may be wrong about the Pantheon. It does represent an unmatched milestone in architecture which triggered no evolutive mimicry but just rather perfect "digital" copies (for instance the Rotunda of the University of Virginia), whereas St. Paul's Cathedral is one of one hundred -or one thousand- very fine "analogic" domes evolved from Brunelleschi's prototype of Santa Maria del Fiore, Florence: drum - dome - lantern. What's amazing about the Pantheon -and its best replicas- is the interior, which is indeed a globe inscribed in a room as shown below










To say that Wren's dome is the best one is arguable of course, if you just compare it to other renaissance type domes. As a personal note, my favourite are perhaps San Lorenzo's and the Holy Shroud's domes in Turin by Guarino Guarini - the former having some precedent in moorish architecture of Spain.

Besides, no matter what's the technical state of the art, when starting to build a domed masterpiece. We know few, if any, of the building techinques of the Pantheon and few also of Brunelleschi's dome. For sure both used a lot of know-how and insights that went lost thorugh the ages, and now it's a riddle to find out back such techniques.
If that be a matter of engineering, any modern skyscraper would win hands down. Still oversized architecture is often dull and non emotional like a pointless teenage who's-the-biggest-dick contest, while +300 ft. domes sprout from the floor where humans live and walk, having something to tell and show us.


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

Interesting exchange on the Pantheon and St. Paul's.

Frankly, I don't mind both. 

The latter is more elliptical (with an inner, middle, and outer dome) which harkens back to Michelangelo's famous indecision in the designs for the dome of St. Peter's (i.e., elliptical versus spherical.) Wren at St. Paul's indeed solves the difficulty of supporting the lantern in an ingenious way, certainly learning from the difficulties that were inevitably met at St. Peter's.

The Pantheon is of course a much earlier solution to the problem (relying on the thickness of the walls to support the coffered dome and having an oculus instead of a lantern). 

It had been noted by some that there is a strong affinity with Wren's designs for the dome of St. Paul's and Mansart's dome at the Invalides in Paris. 

http://www.jstor.org/pss/884134

One can indeed argue that Wren drew from the font of both French and Italian antecedents in his designs for the principal cathedral church of London.


----------



## socrates#1fan (Jul 1, 2008)

Caravaggio said:


> With all do respect Philly Bud but Wren's St. Paul Cathedral is in my opinion an ugly building both form it's exterior and interior.


Are you kidding?
St. Paul is beautiful!


----------



## socrates#1fan (Jul 1, 2008)

DeNeza401 said:


> MMMMNNNnnnn?????? Roman???????? I don't see much Roman architecture but Greeks updo's. However it seems that the US is madly in love with Roman architecture, if any.


We were, now we are faddish and keep putting crap up.


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

The North has always been a fertile ground for the development of a Neoclassical idiom that synthesized both Italian and French tendencies. A wonderful example of this is the Palace at Pavlovsk in Russia.

Created for the Empress Catherine by the London-born Scots architect Charles Cameron, it is in the Greek Revival style then current in both France and England, but exhibiting the marked influence of Palladio. Other noted neoclassical architects such as the Italians Vincenzo Brenna (Cameron's student and successor), Giacomo Quarenghi, Carlo di Giovanni Rossi, the French Jean-François Thomas de Thomon, and the Russian Andrey Voronikhin contributed over the years to the final realization of this palace.

However, one cannot discount the contribution of the Empress Catherine herself, who was knowledgable (though not always receptive) to the ideas of the Enlightenment and who was the founder of this palace.


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

A great unrealized vision of Neoclassical splendor: the plans for the Palace of Haga, by the French architect Louis Jean Desprez, for Gustav III of Sweden. The plan was scrapped after the King's assassination.










The model:










Front elevation and ground plan (piano nobile):


----------



## Tiaren (Jan 29, 2006)

*Berlin* was one of the most important European centres of Classicism. Lots and lots of early and (back then) cutting egde-buildings.
(Some are Greek influenced though)

Neue Wache (New Guardhouse)








http://www.flickr.com/photos/infactoweb/686903038/

Brandenburg Gate








http://www.flickr.com/photos/ganymed/3757949918/sizes/l/

Schauspielhaus (Concert Hall)








http://www.flickr.com/photos/bobindrums/3059958038/

Deutscher Dom (German Cathedral)








http://www.flickr.com/photos/mkuhn/65654853/

Gendarmenmarkt








http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/3858290909/

Altes Museum (Old Museum)








http://www.flickr.com/photos/radunzel/2633485046/

Alte Nationalgalerie (Old National Gallery)








http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/143976612/

Neues Museum (New Museum)








http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/4069770034/

State Opera








http://www.flickr.com/photos/grindcrank/253248269/

St. Hedwig Cathedral








http://www.flickr.com/photos/asmythie/3640447344/

Altes Palais (Old Palace)








http://www.flickr.com/photos/profilacktisch/3788431216/

Mausoleum








http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikedwyer/513734872/

Gorgeous interieur...








http://www.flickr.com/photos/infactoweb/2455703789/


----------



## vittorio tauber (Jul 30, 2008)

*Some italian Pantheon-inspired architectures*

_The "original" Pantheon (AD around 125), Rome_










Replicas (all 19th century neoclassic style)

_Church of Staglieno Cemetery, Genoa_










_San Carlo al Corso, Milan_










_San Francesco di Paola, Naples_ Probably the most imposing










_Canova's Temple (roman catholic church), Possagno (near Treviso)_










_Gran Madre di Dio, Turin_










_Muasoleo della Bela Rosin, Turin_


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

Tiaren said:


> *Berlin* was one of the most important European centres of Classicism. Lots and lots of early and (back then) cutting egde-buildings.
> (Some are Greek influenced though)


Very true!

And some of the greatest proponents of Neoclassicism are also German. The wonderful and mysterious Johann Joachim Winckelmann comes immediately to mind.


----------



## TugaMtl (May 2, 2009)

hh11 how about you stfu. All of your posts have been crap and filled with nonsense.


----------



## Tiaren (Jan 29, 2006)

^^
What the...? Were drunk typing this? XD


----------



## OakRidge (Mar 9, 2007)

*Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception - Springfield, Illinois, USA*

























*Chapel of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity - Santa Paula, California, USA*
Completed in 2009


----------



## Caravaggio (Oct 17, 2009)

socrates#1fan said:


> Are you kidding?
> St. Paul is beautiful!


No I'am not kidding I think it's a dreadful building.I have to stress though that this is my opinion about St. Paul's Cathedral and I don't expect everyone to agree with me.


----------



## Caravaggio (Oct 17, 2009)

Great Pics Oakridge those Catholic churches are really lovely.It's good to see old architectural styles make a come back in Catholic churches after many years of experimenting with modern architecture.As a consequence,many Catholic churches are now very ugly and architecturally insignificant.


----------



## socrates#1fan (Jul 1, 2008)

Beautiful California church! I love it! :cheer:


----------



## vittorio tauber (Jul 30, 2008)

Tha Santa Paula Chapel is fine but the design has few if any fantasy.

The nave is taken from Santo Spirito, Florence. The Dome is a loan from Pazzi Chapel, Florence Again. The Canopy is a 1:3 replica of Bernini's baldachin in St. Peter's Basilica, Rome, and that barrel vault is a topic of venitian early renaissance architecture.

I'm not saying the abovementioned features have been a source of inspiration, I'm arguing the Chapel of Our Lady of the Most Holy Trinity is thoroughly a copy-to-stick exercise. Good quality, but that architect had to dare something more IMHO. Not kitsch though.

The exterior is happier a synthesis.


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

vittorio tauber said:


> Tha Santa Paula Chapel is fine but the design has few if any fantasy.
> 
> The nave is taken from Santo Spirito, Florence. The Dome is a loan from Pazzi Chapel, Florence Again. The Canopy is a 1:3 replica of Bernini's baldachin in St. Peter's Basilica, Rome, and that barrel vault is a topic of venitian early renaissance architecture.
> 
> ...


A very valid criticism. I admit that the borrowings from Santo Spirito and from the St. Peter's baldacchino are much too direct for my liking. "copy-to-stick" is a good way of putting it.

You see it a lot in the US. One example comes to mind: the apse of the Church of St. Clement in Chicago. I need not tell you from which Roman apse it was copied.


----------



## AAL (Sep 13, 2007)

Philly Bud said:


> The Romans borrowed very heavily from the Hellenistic Greeks. The Romans added their own innovations and inventions as well.
> 
> I do not see Renaissance, Baroque, Neo-Classical, or any other kind of architecture as a "copy" or a "rip-off" of an earlier style ... it is not necessarily inferior to the earlier designs. ............
> 
> :soapbox:



I agree. It is very dogmatic to say that era "X" is an era of achievements and era "Y" is an era of copies. Great buildings have been built throught the centuries, and different eras can be credited for different achievements.


----------



## OakRidge (Mar 9, 2007)

*National Shrine of Our Lady of Guadeloupe - Wisconsin*
Completed in 2008





*More photos: http://www.lacrossetribune.com/shared-content/gallery/?galleryid=11*​


----------



## vittorio tauber (Jul 30, 2008)

Oh my!
San Clemente's mosaic in Rome is simply the best christian work of art ever IMO, as I've already stated in the italian forum (disagreement followed).
However the Church of St. Clement in Chicago looks pretty too.


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

vittorio tauber said:


> Oh my!
> San Clemente's mosaic in Rome is simply the best christian work of art ever IMO, as I've already stated in the italian forum (disagreement followed).
> However the Church of St. Clement in Chicago looks pretty too.


Well, they should have selected a different design for the apse. I do think it was too direct an imitiation -- or rather, it IS an EXACT copy, down to the latin verse inscription at the base.


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

And yes, I do love that apse mosaic. I don't know if I would call it my favorite. But it is certainly one of my favorites. The apse mosaic of Sant'Apollinare in Classe is also magnificent.










And so is the Lateran's.











And the beautiful one in Cefalu.










As far as mosaics in general, I admit that my 2 greatest favorites are in Constantinple. 

The first is the stupendous Deisis at Hagia Sophia:











The second one is actually a mosaic cyle: the one in the Church of the Chora. I have special affection for the one showing Theodore Metochites the Donor.










The last 2 are Byzantine, but not totally out of topic. They are late mosaics, when the influence of Western art (particularly Italian) started to be felt in Constantinople.


----------



## vittorio tauber (Jul 30, 2008)

Both yours are great too, being two masterpieces of the so-called palaiologian renaissance.
As for the lateran mosaic, too bad it was heavily restored in the 19th century when the apse was rebuilt backward.

My second favourite christian mosaic in Rome is Santa Pudenziana's, albeit improperly framed in a later age:


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

vittorio tauber said:


> Both yours are great too, being two masterpieces of the so-called palaiologian renaissance.
> *As for the lateran mosaic, too bad it was heavily restored *in the 19th century when the apse was rebuilt backward.
> 
> My second favourite christian mosaic in Rome is Santa Pudenziana's, albeit improperly framed in a later age:


Exactly! I was about to say the same thing. But at least we get an idea of the grandeur of the original, especially in the bust of Christ.

I love the very classical theme of Santa Pudenziana. Christ as a "second" Socrates.


----------



## socrates#1fan (Jul 1, 2008)

vittorio tauber said:


> Tha Santa Paula Chapel is fine but the design has few if any fantasy.
> 
> The nave is taken from Santo Spirito, Florence. The Dome is a loan from Pazzi Chapel, Florence Again. The Canopy is a 1:3 replica of Bernini's baldachin in St. Peter's Basilica, Rome, and that barrel vault is a topic of venitian early renaissance architecture.
> 
> ...


Of course, they took features of multiple structures to create it.
The fact that they mixed these all together makes the structure interesting.
The idea that _everything_ has to be unique and daring isn't a great one.
Sometimes a structure calls to be unique, other times using other styles works perfectly.

One way they could be daring is to blow the back wall out and cover the space with glass. :lol:


----------



## vittorio tauber (Jul 30, 2008)

socrates#1fan said:


> Of course, they took features of multiple structures to create it.
> The fact that they mixed these all together makes the structure interesting.
> The idea that _everything_ has to be unique and daring isn't a great one.
> Sometimes a structure calls to be unique, other times using other styles works perfectly.
> ...


Wait! I didn' say Santa Paula's chapel sucks.
I just pointed out that the interior sounds like a déjà-vu at the first glimpse, and the architect could have blended styles and features in a more eclectic way like he did in the exterior IMHO.
I don't think criticism is a question of Yes/No, Black/White.


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

One can argue that architecturally, perhaps the most influential church in Rome is probably the Gesu. As the mother church of the Jesuits, it was the prototype of countless mission churches throughout the world.

The Gesu:










Well, some people note the striking resemblance of Maderno's Santa Susanna to the much broader facade of the Gesu, and would claim architectural precedence for the former over the latter.

Santa Susanna:


----------



## vittorio tauber (Jul 30, 2008)

tpe said:


> One can argue that architecturally, perhaps the most influential church in Rome is probably the Gesu. As the mother church of the Jesuits, it was the prototype of countless mission churches throughout the world.
> 
> The Gesu:
> 
> ...


So true about the facade.
About the interior, an almost forgotten place in lower Piedmont could be the prototype of the one-nave gesuitic hall of counterreformed churches worldwide.












vittorio tauber said:


> *Santa Croce a Bosco Marengo (Alessandria)*
> 
> Michele Ghislieri became Pope Pius V in 1566: 4 months after his election he got this convent started in his own hometown Bosco (today Bosco Marengo) near Alessandria (Southeast Piedmont).
> He died in 1572, the monastery was achieved as late as 1590, designed by Ignazio Danti, helped by Martino Longhi, Giacomo della Porta, Rocco Lurago.
> ...


----------



## tpe (Aug 10, 2005)

vittorio tauber said:


> About the interior, an almost forgotten place in lower Piedmont could be the prototype of the one-nave gesuitic hall of counterreformed churches worldwide.


I think especially of churches in Southern Germany and Austria.


----------



## 15 (Oct 31, 2009)

The Roman and Austrian architectures look better than the Northern Italian counterparts.


----------



## clikinghere (Nov 29, 2009)

I like the film gladiator...but I dislike Maximus, am a fan of Commodus, appears with the flower patals falling all over the battle field, and wearing the true white Roman emperor armour, descended from his father, Marcus Aurelius. He's an elite, while Maximus is a brainless silly man, only with mascle. I would do the same, poison the old retard. The Italian design to be the superior and hygenic.


----------



## elham (Apr 5, 2010)

*hi*

hi
I'm architecture student and I'm working on the Medici palace Please if you have information about this House give me leave. Thank you
This is my email : [email protected]


----------

