Bearing in mind what was the social condition of Rome during the
middle ages, it becomes easier to understand the architectural
barrenness which at first excites the visitor's surprise. Rome had no
temporal sovereign, and there were therefore only two classes who
could build at all, the nobles and the clergy. Of these, the former
had seldom the wealth, and never the taste, which would have enabled
them to construct palaces graceful as the Venetian or massively grand
as the Florentine and Genoese. Moreover, the constant practice of
domestic war made defence the first object of a house, beauty and
convenience the second. The nobility, therefore, either adapted
ancient edifices to their purpose or built out of their materials
those huge square towers of brick, a few of which still frown over the
narrow streets in the older parts of Rome. We may judge of their
number from the statement that the senator Brancaleone destroyed one
hundred and forty of them. With perhaps no more than one exception,
that of the so-called House of Rienzi, these towers are the only
domestic buildings in the city older than the middle of the fifteenth
century. The vast palaces to which strangers now flock for the sake of
the picture galleries they contain, have been most of them erected in
the sixteenth or seventeenth centuries, some even later. Among the
earliest is that Palazzo Cenci[342], whose gloomy low-browed arch so
powerfully affected the imagination of Shelley.
[Sidenote: Ambition, weakness, and corruption of the clergy.]
It was no want of wealth that hampered the architectural efforts of
the clergy, for vast revenues flowed in upon them from every corner of
Christendom. A good deal was actually spent upon the erection or
repairs of churches and convents, although with a less liberal hand
than that of such great Transalpine prelates as Hugh of Lincoln or
Conrad of Cologne. But the Popes always needed money for their
projects of ambition, and in times when disorder or corruption were at
their height the work of building stopped altogether. Thus it was that
after the time of the Carolingians scarcely a church was erected until
the beginning of the twelfth century, when the reforms of Hildebrand
had breathed new zeal into the priesthood. The Babylonish captivity of
Avignon, as it was called, with the great schism of the West that
followed upon it, was the cause of a second similar intermission,
which lasted nearly a century and a half.
[Sidenote: Tendency of the Roman builders to adhere to the ancient
manner.]
[Sidenote: Absence of Gothic in Rome.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account