Here are the Freshfield drawings of the west, south and east sides of the base of the Column. The south side is, of course, the view in Liebeschuetz' book that you mentioned. You also mentioned the "rather better known North side" but there is, in fact, no drawing of the north side of the Column. That side seems to have been inaccessible to those seeking to draw it.
[attachment=2503]ColumnofArcadius-Westsidebase.jpg[/attachment]
West side
[attachment=2504]ColumnofArcadius-Southsidebase.jpg[/attachment]
South side
[attachment=2505]ColumnofArcadius-Eastsidebase.jpg[/attachment]
East side
However, I would treat these with some caution. They are, I think, to a greater or lesser extent, idealized. I show for comparison the drawing of the west-south-west view of the base as it appears in the somewhat later view of the Column in the Bilbliothèque Nationale in Paris, which shows the west and, partially, the south faces.
This may show the condition of the stonework more accurately but, most significantly, there are substantial differences in the images on the base that cannot be explained by deterioration of the monument in the intervening period. I hesitate to suggest which is the more accurate.
Michael King Macdona
And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)
Could the differences between the two sets of drawings be down to the fact that one set could have been of the Column of Theodosius, the other from the Column of Arcadius?
Quote:Could the differences between the two sets of drawings be down to the fact that one set could have been of the Column of Theodosius, the other from the Column of Arcadius?
A nice idea but, unfortunately, not supported by the history of the columns. The Freshfield drawings are dated 1574 and the Bibliothèque Nationale drawing is dated to the period 1670-1700. The Column of Theodosius apparently fell down in a hurricane in 1517 and the Column of Arcadius was demolished in 1715.
Michael King Macdona
And do as adversaries do in law, -
Strive mightily, but eat and drink as friends.
(The Taming of the Shrew: Act 1, Scene 2)
I have to report some very sad news concernıng the fragments of the Column of Theodosıus/Arcadius.
I am currently ın Istanbul carryıng out some research. Practıcally none of the locals know about these fragments, ın fact they could not care less about them ıt would seem. So trackıng down where they are was a tad dıffıcult at fırst as there are two Beyazıt Hamamı ın the area of Beyazıt square. I fınally dıscovered that the old Beyazıt Hamamı ıs know known as Patrona Halıl Hamamı and it is right on the maın road.
Unfortunately thıs buildıng has undergone extensive 'restoration' and in the process ıt would appear many of the fragments shown ın Michael's photographs have now eıther been covered over ın concrete, covered over by a very dırty, condensatıon fılled glass cover (allowıng a very obscured vıew of some fragments) or many have just dısappeared and are not ın the Istanbul Archeologıcal museum (there ıs only one fragment ın the museum proper, I thınk I may have found another bıt ın the garden, I wıll post the photo's when I get back).
The ınternal staırcase of the Column of Arcadius stıll exısts ın a prıvate garden, nothıng at all exısts of the Column of Theodosıus. Both Columns were orıgınally very close to each other and could easıly be seen from each others locatıon. Anyone hopıng to fınd Late Roman remaıns ın Istanbul ıs goıng to be sadly dısappoınted, many were destroyed to be used ın the makıng of other buıldıngs by the Ottomans so I have been ınformed thıs week.
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, Merlot in one hand, Cigar in the other; body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, what a ride!
it's called progress. We did very much the same thing in earlier periods. Until the 16th c., much of Roman times was still visible, but then something hit us - progress - and we started 'using' the leftovers from the past. Here in the Netherlands, dozens and dozens of megalithic graves were reused in the building of new dykes. hadrian's wall was almost slighted. Roman stones were used in churches, convents, cathedrals... Napoleon destroyed almost every Duth city wall and sold the stones, and most that remained was removed when the cities began to expand by the late 19th c. No use beating the Turks about it, we've all been there. ad:
Robert Vermaat MODERATOR FECTIO Late Romans
THE CAUSE OF WAR MUST BE JUST
(Maurikios-Strategikon, book VIII.2: Maxim 12)
ValentinianVictrix post=303447 Wrote:Could the differences between the two sets of drawings be down to the fact that one set could have been of the Column of Theodosius, the other from the Column of Arcadius?
A nice idea but, unfortunately, not supported by the history of the columns. The Freshfield drawings are dated 1574 and the Bibliothèque Nationale drawing is dated to the period 1670-1700. The Column of Theodosius apparently fell down in a hurricane in 1517 and the Column of Arcadius was demolished in 1715.
IMHO the artistic historical fidelity during the 1670-1700 period was greater than the cultural and artistic attitude of the XVI century, when the Classical culure had just been rediscovered.
The case of the drawings of Raffaello and his followers (Giulio Romano, Perin Del Vaga etc...) in the Domus Aurea in Rome, is perfect to illustrate an attitude of great iconogrphic freedom in dealing with Roman materials during the XV and XVI century.... probably too much freedom for our tastes.
While during the late XVII and early XVIII century the historical consciousnes was already born (with the nations).
So the second drawing (fantastic pic! Thanks I didn't know it!) should be considered closer to the origianl than the famous drawings of the XVI century, but we should know the individual figurative and aesthetic culture and formation of the artist ....the criticism of iconographical sources is very complex and specialised matter.
Quote:Robert wrote: No use beating the Turks about it, we've all been there.
Agreed, which is why I wrote "our times". We tend to view historical relics as if they're a mere curiosity, and do not treat them with the respect they deserve, in Europe, Asia, and everywhere else. Not new to our times, either. The stones and bricks removed from the Flavian Amphitheatre were removed to build other buildings, reportedly.
ad:
