Slike stranica
PDF
ePub

THE WALLS OF AURELIAN AND HONORIUS.

ABOUT the middle of the third Christian century the

Roman state had already been made to tremble before the barbarian hosts from the north, which had invaded its choicest European provinces, and even Italy itself. Rome was felt to be insecure when Ravenna was surrounded by Alemanni, and some flying parties of that nation had, as Gibbon says, displayed their victorious banners almost in sight of the Capitol. These incursions of northern tribes, coupled with the weak government of such princes as Valerian and Gallienus, gave so much encouragement to the barbarians, that serious fears were entertained of a combined attack upon Rome. The reigns of Claudius II. and Aurelian restored the balance of military power; the latter of these captains was victorious over both Goths and Germans, as well as over the formidable monarchy in the East which Zenobia had reared upon the ruins of Roman provinces. The suppression also of a pretender to the Empire afforded an interval of comparative rest, and this was employed upon the construction of a new line of defence round the city. Aurelian determined to rear a much stronger wall, and of uniform character throughout. The plan was conceived on a grand scale, and being taken in hand upon the Emperor's return to Rome, after granting peace to the Vandals, A.D. 271, was partly carried out in his reign. It was finished by his successor, Probus, A.D. 280. The accounts of this work given by several historians are somewhat varied, and not easy to reconcile with the statements of other writers, as interpreted by the existing remains.

Five authors agree that Aurelian built new walls; three mention their greater strength; two the increased extent; one says these were the first walls built round Rome. But, rightly understood, all these statements may be justified. Of their strength there is no question; that they did in some places depart somewhat from the old line, and take in fresh ground, is also certain from some singular arrangements in respect of buildings previously existing. The last statement may also be explained, by considering that these later writers would not use murus in the same sense as that formerly attached to it. The word which in the older language of fortification meant earthwork, had come to stand for walls properly so called, of solid stone or brick. And it was also true that there had been no entire line of defence of uniform construction hitherto put round the whole city.

The previous defences were more or less of patchwork, partly earth and partly stone. Now there was a magnificent rampart of one height, nearly fifty feet, and of equal strength, encircling Rome on every side. It was furnished throughout with square towers at regular intervals, and was battlemented along the whole line. It was pierced with large windows and small windows, and other openings for shooting out rubbish. The great distinguishing feature in it was the corridor, or arcaded passage, running between tower and tower on the inner side of the wall, thus affording a continuous and protected communication, by which sentinels could traverse the whole distance in safety from one end to the other. These arches are often mistaken for the arcaded substructures of aqueducts; this is especially the case between the Amphitheatrum Castrense and the Porta Asinaria, or S. Giovanni, where the outer wall has been destroyed, and the arcade of the corridor stands in clear relief against the sky, so as to closely resemble an aqueduct. It is observable, however, that where the wall includes the old agger, there the arcades break off as superfluous, the passage from tower to tower being supplied by the bank of earth. The finest part of the corridor is near the Porta S. Sebastiano, the old Porta Appia, on both sides of which it is for about half-a-mile perfect. Only one tower in the whole course remains uninjured; many, especially in the south-eastern portion of the city, were rebuilt as round towers after the fall of the Western Empire. The whole structure throughout is of brick, but is always stately in appearance.

A peculiar feature in the plan of this great wall is, that it takes no count of existing structures found standing in the line which it was most convenient to adopt for it. It does not cut through the impediment and half-destroy it, but adopts and imbeds it, as it were, in its own body. Thus near the Porta S. Paolo, the Ostian Gate, it encounters the huge pyramid known as the monument of Caius Cestius, which is more than twice as high as the wall, and half of the pyramid stands within the line of the wall, and half projects outside of its face. At the Porta Salaria, on the northern side of the city, the wall has enclosed the tombs. This was discovered in removing the gate in recent times. A similar arrangement occurred at the Porta Prænestina. Such a position of a burial-place at the entrance of the city is an illustration of the usage, commonly followed by the Romans, of lining the public roads with tombs, and the gates of the city were favourite places for them.

As the power of Rome gradually declined after Aurelian's time, while the hordes of various barbarian stocks kept pressing more closely round her, it was felt that the city itself had to trust more and more to its fortifications, in proportion to the weakness of her arms in the field. The gateways in the line of defence were considered deficient in strength, and consequently Honorius, son of Theodosius, who reigned A.D. 395-425, added gatehouses or gatewayfortresses to all the principal entrances, not destroying the old works, but adding towers to them, so that each became a complete castle in itself. A good illustration of the nature of these additions might till very lately have been seen at the Porta Tiburtina, where the arch and gate of Augustus were walled in by the towers of the later additions. The foss-way leading through the Arch of Augustus having been filled-up in the interval between these Emperors, the bases of the piers of the later gate stand at the present level of the soil; those of the older gate, which were originally at the level of the roadway in the bottom of the foss, are now deeply buried. Inscriptions exist which shew that a great deal of rebuilding took place in the time of Honorius, and of his brother Arcadius. These record that immense repairs and additions along the line of walls, gates, and towers, were effected by those princes, and that Stilicho, their celebrated general, had proposed in the Senate the erection of that inscription in their honour. Hence it is concluded that such alterations were carried out not later than A.D. 400. The work of this period is usually distinguishable by the lighter or yellow colour of the bricks; that of Aurelian is red, and often dark red.

All these precautions, however, failed to render the city secure, which was forced at its weakest point, the Porta Salaria, by Alaric, King of the Visigoths, in 409. On this occasion all that part of the town was burnt, including the house of Sallust the historian, which had been restored in the time of the early Emperors, after its destruction by fire. In 455 Rome was again captured by the Vandals, under their king Genseric, and though there is no precise mention of the walls in the sacking and burning of the city, it is scarcely possible that they should have escaped. Our next record is one of restoration by the hands of Theodoric the Ostrogoth, about the year A.D. 500. That enlightened king, the benefactor of Italy, shewed himself the patron of Rome especially. In the seventh year of his reign he personally visited the old capital of the world, the public works of which attracted his highest admiration. And anxious that the Gothic kings should not be charged with the destruction of ancient glories, he at once took active measures for their preservation. The king's instructions are preserved, in which a professed architect, an annual sum of two hundred pounds in gold, and the customs from the Lucrine port, are assigned for ordinary repairs. The Senators and Prefects of the city are charged, as we learn from Cassiodorus, that nothing is more seriously fitting than the expenditure of money on the buildings of Rome. The "fabric of the wall" is mentioned, and the "guarding against the necessities of war;" and the Prefect is ordered to see that the money sent for the buildings in Rome, which was of large amount, be properly applied to the walls of Rome, and no frauds permitted.

Theodoric also, as it seems, re-constructed some of the gate-fortresses, the style of which resembles the brickwork of that period at Ravenna, the capital of the Gothic kings in Italy. The towers of these gateways are chiefly round, and battlemented. An example of his work is the present structure of the Porta Appia, now S. Sebastiano; this has been attributed also to the Exarchs of Ravenna, who, after the suppression of the Gothic monarchy, were the lieutenants of the Emperors of the East in Italy. But we have evidence of Theodoric's handiwork in that gate, agreeing with some instructions of his which are preserved. For in a letter to the Comes Suna, or Sura, the king directs him to have the squared marble, then lying neglected, employed for the fabric of the wall. And in this Appian gateway the lower stages of the two flanking towers are built of large blocks of marble, apparently taken from some other build

« PrethodnaNastavi »