St Peters Basilica and Hieronymite Monastery of Belem - Assignment Example

Compare and Contrast: St Peter’s Basilica – Rome, Italy, from c. 1551 and Hieronymite Monastery of Belem - Lisbon, Portugal, begun 1502       Art andarchitectural reflections are the best medium for understanding the cultural inclinations of people belonging to a particular society. Since the inception of the globalization the situation has changed as in the cultural and intellectual movement there is unanimity. Anything that has been invented or generated by the people of a particular society, through swift communication methods and cultural interaction, that aspect is carted all over the world. Those aspects have also been widely accepted or rejected by the common people in such a manner as if that aspect was always there in the respective tradition also. However, some centuries back the situation was quite different. Artistic and architectural implications were considered as one of the major sources of understanding a particular culture or essential ingredients of the society. Looking at the architectural forms it is used to be possible to identify which cultural influence has played the greatest role in the construction of the piece of architecture. In order to understand such architectural and structural tradition, people used to depend over the style of construction, both interior and exterior design. In addition to these factors diversity of aesthetic appeal of such structures also used to play a great role in bearing their respective identifiable marks. St Peter’s Basilica in Rome (Italy) and Hieronymite Monastery of Belem of Lisbon (Portugal) are two such masterpieces, haling from the era of renaissance humanism that bear explicit range of diversities in their architectural orientation. Both these structures also bear evidences of such architectural craftsmanship that those are considered by modern structuralists as the instances of all time great classical structures.       St. Peter’s Basilica, located in Vatican City of Italy, is the centre of attraction of the Roman Catholic Church. Since the day of the inception of its establishment, it took almost two centuries and a quarter to complete the whole structure. Though it has not been possible for modern architects and historians to receive the actual constructional map of the basilica but it is due to the simplistic aesthetic approach of construction of this portion, it is not very tough to receive an overview of the basic structure of the St. Peter’s Basilica. Apart from change in dynasty, several other socio-political reasons as well as change of opinion from the Roman emperors, aftermath were also responsible for the delayed construction of the all time great architectural masterpiece. In different times different people were provided with the responsibility to contribute to the construction of the basilica. Among them some of the most mentionable names are, Bernardo Rossellino, Michelangelo Buonarotti and Rafaello da Umbrino. Now, looking at the artistic career of these three artists as well as the others, who have contributed to the construction of the basilica is becomes clear that approach of these artists to architecture different from each other. Yet, such difference has not acted as a barrier against spontaneity of the construction.  There are clear references to such facts that architects, who have been provided with the assignment of completing the basilica, even made changes over the construction of their ancestors, “Assisted by Domenico Fontana, he (Giacomo della Porta) subtly altered Michelangelo’s design for a hemispherical dome, building a taller, more pointed structure based on Brunelleschi’s Florence duomo.” (Langmead, Garnaut, 297) Thus, it is clear from such references that architects of different times were not only inspired through their predecessors’ works but at the same time, while it came to their personal implication of craftsmanship, they made the right proportion of change so that the construction does not deviate from its basic aesthetic appeal.       Prior to the construction of the St. Peter’s Basilica there was also an old St. Peter’s in Rome but due to onslaughts of time it was finally demolished. However, it is quite interesting to see that “The layout of the Cathedral at Tyre was very similar to Old St. Peter’s in Rome… : an entrance led into a square colonnaded courtyard with a fountain or fountains on the axis. Numerous gateways opened into the aisled basilica with clerestories over the colonnade in the towering walls supporting a wooden ceiling.” (Doig, 28) The moment an individual stands before the structural masterpiece he is immediately drawn by its aesthetic and artistic appeal. It is really amazing to see that such a gigantic structure has incorporated within its scope diverse cultural influences yet none of those have overlapped each other. In the older basilica did not contain the appeal of the dome. Presence of the dome in St. Peter’s Basilica has definitely added a unique dimension in the overall appeal of the construction. Whenever a person is looking at a structure, it is the sense of visual fulfillment that adds an extra dimension in his interpretation of the subject. The dome has rightfully satisfied that purpose in the construction. Grandeur, beautification, elegance and overall visual charm of the architectural masterpiece have taken a new dimension with the presence of the dome.       The feeling of visual pleasure that overwhelms the viewer persistently continues as he moves inside the basilica. The interior construction of the place is equally magnificent as that of its outer appearance. It is a very common conception about the artistic activism that only being technically correct does not make a piece of architecture immortal but at the same time it is also important for the artist to visualize his creation from an impersonal perspective so that he can actually see the creation from the aesthetic perspective of the other people. “The floors were of marble laid in patterns. As at Tyre, the entrance of St. Peter’s faced the rising sun on the lower slope of the Vatican Hill.” (Doig, 28) The total interior space of the St. Peter’s Basilica is almost 391 by 208 feet in Roman measurement and this basilica is connected with the main compound through several doors. Impression of the plan has been provided by Domenico Tasselli through his painting. The St. Peter’s Basilica is actually built for serving funerary purposes but funeral of the common people is not allowed in here. It is “unlike other funerary halls of Rome it was focused on the grave of the martyr.” (Doig, 28) During the time of construction of the basilica the baroque style architecture was mostly prevalent and the same architectural reflection was also there in the construction of the St. Peter’s Basilica. The attempt of assimilating sculpture with architecture has provided the structure a unique appeal which has provided it with a niche of its own. Edward Foley has observed, “More than any other building project of the sixteenth century, the reconstruction of St. Peter’s in Rome chronicled the transition from renaissance to baroque architecture.” (Foley, 247) The year 1560 is widely regarded as the commencement of the renassiance humanism and the death of Michelangelo in the year 1564 made it clearer that artistic outlook of the common people would shift from the ideologies of the Roman High Renaissance that was mainly centered over developing an “individualistic view of life.” (Grundmann, Fürst, 162) St. Peter’s Basilica is one of the exceptional masterpieces of this era that bears conspicuously these marks of such radical change in the ideological approaches. Since the year 1568 onwards development of II Gesu (B1) commenced and it exhibited an “approach to church building that deviated radically from centrally planned architecture, the preferred type of the High Renaissance, laying the foundations for Baroque architecture in terms of types and artistic treatment.” (Grundmann, Fürst, 162) Preference of the artists to make different types of architectural structures was becoming more prominent during this period of time. Looking at the architectural pieces of the Roman High Renaissance period it becomes clear that artists were more concerned about developing centrally planned constructions. Most of the building or churches that were constructed during that the time of High Renaissance lacked the feature of vastness or openness. Those were mostly narrow from both sides and used to grow towards the upward direction. On the other hand, analyzing the post High Renaissance architectures, we see that those are vaster and covered the expanse in the sidewise direction. Both in the styles of interior and exterior decoration there used to be several unique features. Stefan Grundmann and Ulrich Fürst observes, “Overall form was at least as important for Baroque architecture as establishing a type.” In this context the authors have made a comparison. May be this comparison does not have any direct link with the structures that are main concern of the paper, but at the same time it will also explain the uniqueness as well as some of the identifiable marks of the baroque architecture pieces, “Compared with its most important predecessor. Alberti’s S. Andrea in Mantua, the side chapels in II Gesu were much lower and the transepts much less deep, and also spaces between the side chapels were reduced to double supports.” (Grundmann, Fürst, 162) Though at initial stage it was planned that the construction will be developed depending over the conventional grand High Renaissance style and the contemporary designer Donato Bramante developed a plan for designing the Basilica according to the centrally planned constructions, where there would be “a series of small Greek crosses (four arms of equal length) surrounding one large Greek Cross. This plan was to express symbolically the church’s position at the centre of the Western church, Christianity, and the world.” (Foley, 248) Aftermath Bramante, Michelangelo was provided with the responsibility for designing the church and he also came up with more simplified changes in the construction. In the later phase of his life Michelangelo also realized the openness of baroque architecture and through such simplified changes in becomes clear that he was actually attempting to imply all these aspects in his creativity.       These types of changes in the artistic and sculptural depictions also carry the symbols that approach of common people in handing their cultural elements; respective treatment as well as interpretation of different aspects of life was changing. The society was moving from the direction of High Renaissance or centralized idea of life to the open minded interpretation about different aspects of life. Baroque architecture is a clear example of such change in cultural arena of the age of renaissance humanism and finally it was capable of doing “something that the High-Renaissance buildings has failed to do: in this case the Roman style became generally accepted not only in Italy but in France and Germany as well, and swept away from the last Gothic net vaulting there.” (Grundmann, Fürst, 162)        Compared to the structural innovations or changes that reflected through the St. Peter’s Basilica, the Hieronymite Monastery of Belem exists in stark contrast. Though both these constructions were formed at the same period of time but looking at the structural application of the monastery it seems that on one hand St. Peter’s Basilica was moving away from the gothic architectural style and on the other, the Hieronymite Monastery of Belem was incorporating within its scope different aspects that were very much related or bared a deal of similarity with gothic structuralism. However, it would be wrong if we come to the conclusion that Roman High Renaissance cultural outlook inspired the architectural technique that was adopted for the construction of the Portuguese monastery, “The architectural masterpieces undertaken in the time of Manuel (1495-1521) set the pattern for a national style called Manueline, though its influence long outlived the king himself and extended into the other arts as well. Historians of architecture have generally agreed that the Manueline style is a peculiar Portuguese form of flamboyant Gothic which acquired its individuality through lavish use of decorative motifs derived from various European and foreign prototypes.” (Lach, Frederick, 57) It has been a matter of great debate among the scholars that they were actually searching for the sources of influence that finally led to the development of the unique architectural genre. Several scholars are there who find explicit examples of Asian cultural influence over construction of the monastery and scholars belonging to the older school of structuralism are of opinion “…Manuelino, also called Atlantic Gothic, derived from the sea, although some modern-day observers detect a surrealism that foreshadowed Salvador Dali’s style. Everything about Manueline art is a celebration of seafaring ways.” (Porter, Prince, 416) The unique style of the Manueline architecture is reflected through the startling combination between Christian iconography with religious symbols, imaginative shapes belonging to the world of oceans and the other aspects that are used frequently as everyday articles for the purpose of seafaring.       While attempting to identity the actual nature of the Manueline style, some of the scholars often argue that it is not a genuine style as it is actually generated through the fusion of different cultural influences. Other architectural experts clearly claim that this style is very much original and uniquely Portuguese as, according to their claims, there are no other cultural influences that have helped in the development of the architectural cult. However, it is interesting to observe that there also exists another school of historians who claim that Manueline “as a style of European architecture which draws heavily, both in form and decoration, from Indian edifices.” (Lach, Frederick, 58)       The Hieronymite Monastery of Belem and the Belem tower both are widely regarded as the masterpiece creations of the era and at the same time both of these architectural masterpieces, according to the opinion of several historians, compliment and supplement each other. It has also been one of the great features of the Manueline architectural style that it incorporates within its scope the imagistic applications of the Moorish culture. Fusion of Christian iconography and Moorish images provides the craftsmanship of these two structural landmarks a special place in the history of the world. According to the historians “The Moorish influence is readily seen in both buildings, as are the references to maritime accomplishments.” (Olsen, 270) The moment a person looks at the structure of the Hieronymite Monastery of Belem, he will understand that it can said to be a gothic structural example of Portugal. The south portal is the main entrance of the monastic church and it has been designed by the contemporary famous Manueline architect João de Castilho. It has been one of the most important features of the gothic structure that it is generally centrally planned architecture. Once a visitor comes inside through the south portal he finds himself confined within the boundaries of the monastery and standing at the centre of the arena he will feel that everything around him are located and crafted with a proper balance. The gothic charm of the architecture has been further extended with the depiction of the cloisters and the pointed pillars at the top of the structure. It has been one of the explicit characteristics of the gothic architecture that it will contain such structures. Both in the cloisters as well as the structures at the top of the building, presence of the coned and pointed structures clearly provides the whole building with a gothic charm. “The west door leads into the cloisters, where the stonework is even more impressive than the church. Designed by João de Castilho, the cloisters have two levels, the lower one having a groin vault and the most exuberant decoration. Virtually every surface of the arches and pillars are covered in elaborate Manueline sculpture.” (Jeronimos Monastery, Lisbon) Unlike the simplicity and openness of the St. Peter’s Basilica, this structure is quite narrow. At the same time the aesthetic impulse aspect has been aroused through the complicated structural orientation that has been reflected through the imagistic depictions over the interior portion of the monastery. The main entrance exhibits different statues and presence of the legendary Henry the Navigator enhances gravity of the whole ambiance. Ceiling of the monastery is featured with “a wave-like and flowing style, typical of Manueline architecture. The ceiling is designed to evoke ropes, anchors, and the sea.” (Olsen, 271) In this context also we see that the architectural masterpiece also differs considerably from that of the St. Peter’s as the Roman architectural marvel has been more focused over simplicity. The interior of St. Peter’s also contains iconography or use of symbolic presentation but at the same time it also reflects simplistic orientation of the whole theme. The viewer will be surprised with the feeling that simplicity can really create difference. The iconographic presentations over the interior of the monastery surprises us as we see the presentation have been done with such care and mastery. In this context it is interesting to observe that both simplistic and complicated craftsmanship are capable of boosting a person’s surprise and the sense of aesthetic pleasure. Both simplistic and complicated presentations have such capacities that can appeal to the pleasure seeking psyche of a person and at the same time it helps him to appreciate art from diverse aspects.       The modern interpreters of structuralism have opined that the construction of the monastery has greatly been influenced by the structuralist elements of the Hindu aesthetic principles. Some of the historians have also opined that the construction as well as decoration of both the exterior and interior parts has been influenced through the imagistic presentation as it can also be observed in the interiors of the Jain temples. Though in the practical situation, there is not much scope behind denial of such logic and the historical references are also suggesting that during the contemporary time there was regular trade exchange between the two nations but it seems that such influences are secondary. Looking at the socio-economic structure of the contemporary Portuguese society it becomes clear that the society was on the highest reach of economic achievement and it also resulted in developing an elitist mentality among the common people. It seems the cultural changes that occurred during the time of High Renaissance of Rome, the same kind of mentality has also been formed by the common people of Portugal and due to development of such mentality people inclined or appreciated the taste of such centrally planned architecture.       In the conclusion it can be said that though both these structures belong to almost contemporary time period and at the same time both are considered to be masterpieces in their respective fields, but both of them differ from each other through structural perspectives. It can also been interpreted through the analysis of the structure of these two pieces of architecture that social, political and economic aspects have a great deal of influence over the development of the sense of aesthetic appreciation of the society. On one hand St. Peter’s is one of the greatest examples of the renaissance humanism era and on the other hand the structural interpretation of the Hieronymite Monastery of Belem signifies the triumph over monarchial system as well as tendency of the society to gain more capital, only to signify the tendency of the common people in the contemporary society. Both these architectural marvels not only signify the process of humanity towards appreciation of Arts but at the same time those have emerged as mirrors through which the actual picture of the society become clear.                     Works Cited: 1. Doig, Allan, Liturgy and architecture from the early church to the Middle Ages, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2008 2. Foley, Edward, From Age to Age: How Christians Have Celebrated the Eucharist, Liturgical Press, 2009 3. Frederick, Donald, Lach, Donald F, Asia in the Making of Europe, Volume II, University of Chicago Press, 1994 4. Fürst, Ulrich,  Grundmann, Stefan, The architecture of Rome: an architectural history in 400 individual presentations,  Edition Axel Menges, 1998 5. Garnaut, Christine, Langmead, Donald, Encyclopedia of architectural and engineering feats, ABC-CLIO, 2001 6. Jeronimos Monastery, Lisbon, available at: http://www.sacred-destinations.com/portugal/lisbon-jeronimos-monastery, retrieved on: 2nd June, 2009 7. Olsen, Brad, Sacred Places Europe: 108 Destinations, CCC Publishing, 2007 8. Prince, Danforth, Porter, Darwin, Frommers Portugal, John Wiley and Sons, 2006 Read More