|
|
 |
|
Forum, Markets and Column of Trajan |
|
written
by mcwilson / 09.05.2004 |
|
|
| |
Function |
| |
| |
|
|
| Trajan's Column |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
| Column Detail |
|
| |
|
It is a matter of much discussion whether Trajan’s Forum was originally constructed with the idea of incorporating Trajan’s sepulcher, but evidence involving the figures incorporated into the design of the structures suggests as such. First, many columns had been constructed before the great column within the Forum for the purpose of honoring great Roman citizens, none of which incorporated a chamber of any sort into the base. The construction of the hollow base would have made engineering the construction of the cumbersome column resting above considerably more difficult. In addition, there is a recognized similarity between the layout of the column’s base, and a widely used type of Roman funerary altar. These altars, as Trajan’s column, incorporate double doors topped by an inscription, and are decorated with icons reflecting the role of the chamber. A frieze of winged Victories, eagles, and weaponry decorate the entrance to the chamber, which celebrate the emperor’s power in warfare and his eventual victory over death in apotheosis. These figures are repeated in decorations throughout the components of the forum, which further indicate that the initial plan for the forum incorporated a funerary element. It is not a surprise, however, that decor of the chamber and of the Forum as a whole, exudes ambiguity. It was not in the least bit customary for the Emperor to choose his resting place, but the senate, who did not begin debating on the issue until after his death. Burial within the pomerium was an extraordinary honor, and for an emperor to assume his burial in such an area was incredibly presumptive. Such an impendence on tradition as an Emperor excavating his own burial site might have rendered the fate of Julius Caesar upon him: assassination for being entirely too presumptive.
The manner in which the column was constructed adds to the controversy over whether the monument was initially intended as a funerary column. There has been much discussion over the size of the monument, and the difficulty viewing the entire frieze carved into the column from the ground. The figures in the scenes carved into the column are approximately 2/3 normal size, but the height of the column makes even these detailed figures difficult to see. Many believe that the difficulty of viewing the column from the ground, and the lack of alternate viewing areas was an engineering mistake. This, however, is not such an arguable claim when one looks at the monument again as functioning as a funerary element. It is rather disorienting for a person experiencing the column to continually circumambulate the column while facing sharply upwards to visualize the frieze. There may have been a point to this disorientation of the viewer, however, in the keeping with Romans’ belief of continuing a person’s memory on earth as opposed to relying on an afterlife to continue their being. The disorientation of the viewer, the Romans believed, served to put the viewer in a place somewhere between the world of the living, and that of the dead. This would bring the viewer closer to the deceased while experiencing the tale of his great victory in war.
It is important to note, however, that Romans of Trajan’s time were distrustful, if not completely uncertain of the existence of an afterlife. Therefore, the utility of the column as a memorial to Trajan was perhaps primary. A practice used by many to ensure the immortality of a person after death was the construction of a living memory, where the person would continue to live through the memory of others. In the example of Trajan’s column, people would be forced to walk around the column to view the frieze, whose circumambulation was suggestive of the continuation of time, and disorientation indicative of the constant wavering of a person viewing the column between the world of the living and that of the dead. Romans believed that a person did not move directly from life to death, but rather through a tripartite change of state, from life, to nearly dead, to dead. By forcing people to circumambulate the column, the survival of Trajan’s memory was assured continuation in one of Rome’s most visited areas, where people from distant areas could experience his monument and perpetuate his memory while accomplishing their daily errands at the market. The frieze, which depicted his glorious victories in the Dacian wars, promoted remembrance of the great emperor, as well as propagandizing the story of his great war against the Dacians and thus the power of the Roman military.
The way in which a person accessed the top of the column, through the spiraling staircase within, was equally as disorienting as circling the column’s base. With its confined space, lack of consistent sources of light and seemingly unending spiral, the staircase would sufficiently disorient a person before releasing them back into daylight at the top where the entire forum and the nearby areas of Rome were visible. From the perspective of the column’s top, 150 feet above the ground, one might be reminded of yet another one of the functionalities of the Forum.
Many elements of the Forum contributed to the defense of the Dacian wars, including the overall architectural layout of the buildings. Some say that the arrangement of the buildings depicts the manner in which Roman military camps were constructed, as the military’s organization is an attribute that is said to have contributed a great deal to their success. This is not entirely surprising as Trajan chose his military engineer, Apollodorus of Damascus to oversee the final excavation of the site and the building of its primary structures.
Not only was this Forum laid out differently than those before it, but it was funded and even for the most part born by the very toils of the war it defended. The column was not the only element that contained decoration depicting the Dacian wars. Marble statues of Dacian prisoners were staged throughout the Forum, as well as in other elements of interior decoration present in the Bibliotheca Ulpia, the dual Greek and Latin libraries flanking the column’s courtyard. These elements indicate that perhaps one of the Forum’s more important functionalities was to fend off allegations that the Dacian wars were a negligent waste of resources. It is quite clear that the message intended by the Forum’s architect was that the wars were quite prosperous, and that their Emporer who led them through the battles was to be credited for the great achievement, even in death.
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
