Comparison of Roman and Greek Architecture
Architecture has been a fundamental cornerstone for building societies throughout the entire human development. Architecture in general is constantly changing but the ideas that have been formulated tend to come back and influence the next. They say those who forget history are doomed to repeat it and we can see how we are constantly repeating ourselves in terms of architecture. I shall compare and contrast the Greek and Roman ideal styles of architecture, by breaking down both of their discoveries and similarities.
Greek architecture has several qualities that mark its work as a fundamental cornerstone in architecture. The Greeks had introduced several interesting factors; the scale of building was now proportioned to that of the human body. Greek architecture had a seemingly positive outlook on things, unlike its predecessors like the Egyptians which brought out the death in architecture. Greek architecture was considered the celebration of life. The most prestigious architectural achievement set forth by the Greek ancestry was the Parthenon, a temple dedicated to Athena. According to The Humanistic Tradition, written by Gloria K. Fiero, the Parthenon represented the apex of a long history of post-and-lintel temple building among the Greeks. The Greeks had introduced three of the five basic columns in classical architecture which are the Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian columns. Opposed to the Greeks, the Romans had never created their own columns rather re-invited the one the Greeks had made, rendering them different in comparison. The Roman’s had created the Roman Doric columns and the Roman Tuscan columns. Both of which are enhanced version of the Greeks’ Doric column. Like most of Rome’s architectural achievements, their work was merely a rendition of past works. Another prime example which was taken from the Etruscans was the Arch, which was fortified by the Romans and in term led to the Barrel Vault; according...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document