Monumental Washington D.C.

For this week’s blog, I went back to a city that I was fortunate enough to visit: Washington D.C. 

Washington D.C. has many monuments and a city plan to emphasize its importance and centrality in the United States. One of the pivotal sections of the city is the National Mall where monuments stand in a display of America’s power and identity. 

One of the structures around the National Mall is the United States Capitol Building, the meeting place of the U.S. Congress. This massive building is located at eastern end of the National Mall and sits on top of the Capitol Hill. It has elements of Ancient Greek and Roman architecture in its design with the large dome and the columns on each side of the structure. From its location on the Capitol Hill, it looms over the National Mall, giving a sense of dominance and power both with its size and design. This structure was used as an origin for how D.C. was planned and how the quadrants of D.C. were divided, making it a symbolic and physical epicenter to the political heart of the United States. 

The United States Capitol Building
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:United_States_Capitol_west_front_edit2.jpg
(accessed April 12, 2013).

The United States Capitol Building
(from a location off of the National Mall).

The United States Capitol Building
(from Old Post Office Tower). 

I would also like to mention another monument, the National Monument, which stands on the opposite end of the National Mall. This structure is an obelisk built to commemorate George Washington. I didn’t know its significance when I went, but I still thought it was both a beautiful and awe inspiring monument. This obelisk is seen not only in D.C. but in other places like Paris, Egypt, Rome, and the United Kingdom; it is a symbol of power going back millennia to represent the strength of a leader and a nation. To have two such structures communicates not only power and strength, but a sense of history. 

The National Monument

The National Mall is used to draw the individual (it is also used for political events and ceremonies) and orient them on certain planned paths. The National Mall is very long and wide and holds some of the greatest monuments known today. Among the buildings in a section of the city that was designed to reflect the core of America’s power, it is hard not to feel awed.

Aerial View of National Mall
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Themallwiki.jpg
(accessed April 12, 2013).

That’s all for now and unfortunately this is my last blog, but it’s been a great adventure traveling around the world to discover amazing cities and architectural masterpieces. I hope you’ve also had a great time! 

I'm off. 

Laws of the Indies

For this week’s blog, I studied the Settlement Ordinances in the Laws of the Indies by Philip II (1573), that the Spanish colonizers followed for the establishment of New World cities. 

For the location of the new town, colonizers had to choose land based on its fertility, its indigenous population, medium elevation, distance from ocean, and access to harbor for economic purposes. If towns were located by rivers, it was established on the eastern banks. 

Once the site is chosen, lots are measured and organized. Peonia and caballenas are two differently measured urban lots that are given measurements for the width and depth, but other forms of measurement were used for farmland and pastures. 

Farmland uses yields of bushels (156) of wheat or barley to determine its size while pastures have to hold a certain number of animals, such as 100 sheep and 20 goats. It seems odd that the land has two different forms of measurement instead of using feet, especially when the Spanish were attempting to design a more organized settlement. 

The town had to meet the above mentioned criteria, however, it was also specified that it should be fortified, open to the north wind and not lie where the sea was to the south or west of it. These ordinances, while strange at first, is similar to the native Mesoamericans who used cardinal points and sun positions to determine the orientation of their own cities. 

 The plaza was meant to be the starting point for the town. It was described as being square or rectangular and proportioned to the number of inhabitants. Dimensions were given, though many of the plazas were already built before these ordinances. There are 4 principal streets originating from the plaza and the plaza is oriented to face the 4 principal winds.  

 While the Spaniards were given these ordinances, they did use the old Mesoamerican cities as a template to perfect their own designs because the original cities were perfectly organized.

What I found interesting is the way the towns were carefully designed. It was taken into careful consideration how it was laid out (order), with the plaza as a key feature and nature (wind, rivers, elevation, etc.) playing a huge role in deciding where to plot the town, how it would be oriented and why it was built in such a way. 

That's all for now!

I'm off. 

Reconquista

For this week’s blog, I studied the cities of Granada and Santa Fe de Granada, both located in Spain. These cities are situated very close to one another in the region of Spain that was once under Islamic control. In 1492, the Catholic Monarchs from Spain conquered the territory, bringing with it a new era of urban form and religion. 

In Granada before the reconquering, it was a Medieval and Islamic controlled city with its respective forms and monuments. When it was conquered, the Spanish brought Gothic, Renaissance and Classical architecture to fill the city and meld the Spanish-Muslim cultures. Also, to ensure that the Spanish were considered the conquerers, they needed to establish their own identity within the city. They did add the Renaissance and Classic architecture and adornments, but they also added monuments to juxtapose those of the Islamic order (such as the Palace of Charles V). Compared to Santa Fe, which was a grid-planned and Spanish created city, Granada was and still remains an organic city. 

Granada-Alhambra
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Alhambra_de_Granada,_vista_general_(Spain).jpg
(accessed March 22, 2013).

Granada
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PanoGranada1.jpg
(accessed March 22, 2013).

Palace of Charles V
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Palacio_Carlos_V_west.jpg
(accessed March 22, 2013).

In the effort to conquer Granada, Santa Fe was established by the Catholic Monarchs as a fortified military camp. By doing so, they were able to deliver a serious blow to the fortified center of Granada- Alhambra. 

Santa Fe is built in the same manner as Roman and Spanish cities (such as Thamugadi and Tenochtitlán) because they are all built in a grid-plan format. This suggests that it was built to establish the new order of the conquerer and to set up the control of the Catholic Monarchs. 

With a place of control directly outside of Granada, this allowed them to establish a force strong enough to take the Islamic city. Not only that, but it probably brought in the new Spanish architectural form. While it was introduced in Santa Fe, it was slowly established in Granada, bringing together a mesh of different architectural forms. 

Today, Santa Fe has some relics of its grid-plan, though the walls that once surrounded the city are no longer there, the four gates that intersected the wall still remain (this suggests that there was a certain flow to the city). 

Santa Fe de Granada (aerial view)
http://hotelesandalucia.es/UserFiles/images/pueblos/Granada/santafe/555.jpg
(accessed March 22, 2013).

Santa Fe was a new center created to conquer and juxtapose Granada and to ensure that the Spanish were in power. Today, what can be seen of the two cities’ relationship is the architectural styles of the conquering Spanish, and the monuments that still remain.   

That's all for now!

I'm off.

Tenochtitlán before Mexico City

For this week’s blog, I studied the ancient Aztec city of Tenochtitlán. What I did not know was Tenochtitlán was exactly where Mexico City is located today; more specifically, it is buried under the city because of the Spanish conquering. 

But before the Spanish conquered Tenochtitlan, the city was one of the largest at the time (1400s) and it was a massive centre of political, religious and economic power. It was laid out in a grid pattern (very similar to Teotihuacan) and more compressed in scale. All of the main markets, complexes, and buildings were pushed together so the city had a distinguished core. At the centre, in the precinct (enclosed by the Coatepantli or the Snake Wall) were pyramids, temples and sacrificial altars. Also at the centre of this Aztec universe was the Templo Mayor, a dual palace that represented the zone of man, the 13 levels of Heaven and nine levels of the Underworld. 

Map of Tenochtitlán
http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/aztecs/tenochtitlan-color.jpg
(accessed March 8, 2013).

Model of Tenochtitlán
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/97/Model_of_Tenochtitlan.jpg
(accessed March 8, 2013).

All of this shows how Tenochtitlán was tied and centered around religious beliefs and practices, deities, cosmology and power. Of all the Aztec sites, Tenochtitlán was the most divergently planned to show its grandeur and to distinguish it from the other cities. 

When Tenochtitlán fell, the Spanish razed most of Tenochtitlán to the ground before building Mexico City. As Mexico City was built, it was done so in European style and traditions. 

Mexico City- The Angel of Independence
http://www.mtwmexicocity.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Mexico_City.jpg
(accessed March 8, 2013).

Mexico City Cathedral (built by Spaniards over ruins of Tenochtitlán's main temple, Templo Mayor)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mexico_City_Zocalo_Cathedral.jpg
(accessed March 8, 2013).

But why would the Spanish raze and rebuild their colonial capital on a city that represented power? 

To destroy such a monumental city seems unimaginable, however, there is a significance in the Spanish (and most conquering nations) doing this. The Spanish shared a similar set of beliefs with the Mesoamericans when conquering another city; this included destroying the temples and ideological structures belonging to the conquered people and rebuilding upon the razed territory to signify a new order. 

To rebuild the city showed their control, power and superiority as the rulers of Mexico City. I can understand that to conquer, to gain that power, and to set in stone that you were the rulers made it necessary to rebuild a new empire. The Greeks, Romans and other empires exemplified this in their own efforts to become more powerful nations. It was necessary to show that they, in the end, were in control.  

That's it for now!

I'm off. 

Maya-Toltec

For this week’s blog I studied, compared and contrasted the two structures from the Mesoamerican sites of Chichén Itzá and Tula. There is not much information of either site apart from what can be gathered from the architecture. 

The two structures that I looked at were the Temple of the Warriors and Pyramid B from Chichén Itzá and Tula respectively. At first glance between the photographs of these structures, they appear almost identical. Almost.

Chichén Itza-Temple of the Warriors
http://www.chriskuzneski.com/death/virtual_files/warriors.jpg
(accessed March 2, 2013)

Tula-Pyramid B
http://theslideprojector.com/images/art9/The%20Art%20of%20Mesoamerica/Chapter%208-%20Fall%20of%20Classic%20Cities/pyramid%20b.jpg
(accessed March 2, 2013)

Both structures rise up in tiers, their sides slanting upwards with steps ascending to the top, for processions and ritual purposes. There are pillars at the front of both, and they reach the first steps (perhaps as the base for some sort of covering). At the top of the structures, it is easier to see the differences between the two. 

The Temple of the Warriors has a different arrangement at the top with what appears to be the remnants of walls around pillars that represent nobles, priests, and warriors. There is also a pathway that leads towards a statue of Chac-Mool (who has a flat belly which may have been the place for rituals, ceremonies and sacrifice).  

Chac-Mool on Temple of the Warriors
http://media-3.web.britannica.com/eb-media/95/122195-004-476CA6A1.jpg
(accessed March 2, 2013)

Pyramid B has a completely flat top with statues arranged together. They represent Toltec warriors and stand around smaller pillars. This may have also been an area of sacrifice and a place of congregation. 

Toltec Warriors on Pyramid B
http://instructional1.calstatela.edu/bevans/Art101/Art101B-6-Pre-Columbian/WebPage-ImageF.00027.jpeg
(accessed March 2, 2013)

The structures may appear to be the same size, but of the two monuments, the Temple of the Warriors is a little more monumental. Not only is it larger, but the slope of this structure is much steeper (difference in rituals or ceremonies from Tula??). Both sites use these structures to connect to the deities and both incorporate the Feathered Serpent or Quetzalcoatl (god of conquest and death) in their architecture. 

What I found very interesting was how both sites, despite differing influences (Mayan or Aztec) and differing locations in Mesoamerica, shared a strong resemblance. There is a theory of Toltec (Tula) occupation of Chichén Itzá which emphasizes the sacrificial, ritualistic and conquering nature of both occupants (shown in architecture). That one of them conquered another may be a possibility, but I like to think that maybe, maybe this is a case of two distant sites sharing and communicating through architecture (similar to colonialism???). Or maybe that’s just another theory. 

That's it for now!

I'm off.

Teotihuacan: The City of the Gods

For this week’s blog, I looked at the Precolumbian site of Teotihuacan in Mexico. The people who built the site and the significance of them are still up for debate so I visited (once again virtually) the structures of the Pyramids of the Moon and the Sun -which are located along la Calzada de los Muertos or the Avenue of the Dead- to see for myself. 

Starting up the Avenue of the Dead, I could see how huge the site is. The street itself extends so far and wide that I feel like there should be a procession walking here. The first pyramid that I see is the Pyramid of the Sun and to the north, at the end of the street, is the Pyramid of the Moon. Of the two, the Pyramid of the Sun is the largest, but both are so big that they rise above the rest of the structures and plazas to mirror the height and shape of the mountains. They both have rounded tops and stairs that lead up to the top so tourists (my virtual self included) can see the entire planned site from a bird’s eye view.  

Site Plan for Teotihuacan
http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hg/hb_teot_18.jpg
(accessed February 12, 2013)

Pyramid of the Sun
http://www.sacredsites.com/americas/mexico/images/pyramid-sun-01-500.jpg
(accessed February 12, 2013)

Pyramid of the Moon
http://mw2.google.com/mw-panoramio/photos/medium/2666068.jpg
(accessed February 12, 2013)

Inside (sadly where no virtual being can enter), the pyramids show evidence of burial sites and sacrificial offerings, giving an insight to what may have been a ritualistic society. This also implies that the pyramids were for the people to have a place to worship and connect with their deities (it could even symbolize deities or a deity). Since the pyramids do look like mountains, it could symbolize the earth and the people’s spiritual connection to the earth.          

Teotihuacan is laid out using cosmic harmony (stars) to orient the placement of the structures. The Pyramid of the Sun is located in the place where the Sun would have been at its highest point; the Avenue of the Dead is 90 degrees to the Pyramid of the Sun’s principle axis and the Pyramid of the Moon was placed to the North (perhaps to reflect the North star or true North).  

View from top of Pyramid of the Moon
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com
(accessed February 12, 2013)

The pyramids, their placement and symbolism are part of the history of an unknown society but they are here for all of us (virtually or not) to see and explore for the marvels that they are. Not knowing who built them or for what purpose is all part of the journey. 

That’s it for now. 

I'm off. 

Thamugadi, meet Pikillacta

For this week’s blog, I was asked to explore two archaeological sites, Thamugadi and Pikillacta, and compare and contrast them. 

First, the site of Thamugadi, or Timgad, was a Roman colony founded in 100 CE by the emperor Trajan. The colony was a home for retired legionaries in the region of North Africa (Algeria). It was planned with a grid-like pattern and as a large square legionary camp that was divided into 12 equal blocks. This was unusual because the city of Rome is not planned at all; it is very organic. The reason for the grid pattern was to control the flow of traffic and to invoke a military presence. It was also planned this way to represent the hierarchal order within the colony; the centre for the elite, and going down the social classes the further outward. This was to maintain status and roles within society (the centre was for administrators). There was a basilica, curia (senate house), temple, a 4,000 seat theatre, public baths and two main avenues (cardo and decumanus). Some of the structures in the colony emulated those from the city of Rome and may have been integrated to recognize the authority and power of the Roman Empire. 

Around 200 CE, with a population of 15,000, Thamugadi had sprawled to accommodate the growth of the Empire. Eventually, the site was completely abandoned in 7th century CE. Most of the ruins are well preserved, the Arch of Trajan being one of the most prominent. 

Thamugadi (Timgad)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Timgad_Trajan.jpg

(accessed January 30, 2013).

Arch of Trajan-Thamugadi
http://www.robertabarresi.com/timgad2.jpg
(accessed January 30, 2013).

Thamugadi (Timgad)

https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMCyyikRlmCybqh5ANKU93rMulGezuVO2WbmlRF7sv-xLWMIFbVu8E5Ebvr5TX7slmpFwp2uOrHGCzghUK0AD5rLk3JFUR0cV6LWpoXwdWM9H6wW6yk_-isY9D_dI4YOXMXiQN13Tlt9Om/s1600/Timgad.jpg

(accessed January 30, 2013).

The other site Pikillacta, is located in Cuzco, Peru in the Lucre Basin. Pikillacta was part of the Wari Empire, though, unlike Thamugadi, the function of the site is still unknown. Based on the architecture of the site, it may have been used as an administrative and/or military centre. 

Similar to Thamugadi, Pikillacta has a large rectangular plan and a grid-like pattern that is also well preserved. Patio groups, niched halls and smaller, conjoined buildings are similar characteristics among Pikillacta and other Wari sites (such as Viracochapampa), and like the Roman Empire’s colonies, may be symbols of empirical power. 

This site, unlike Thamugadi, is incomplete. Of the four sectors, only Sector 2 was completed and actually occupied. 

Pikillacta has narrow gates, high walls, and walk-ways that force one to walk a certain path which gives the impression of a militaristic function to the site. This is similar to Thamugadi because both were created with militaristic attributes and situated in strategical locations to serve administrative or empirical purposes; such as Pikillacta’s location intercepting the main route from Bolivia and northern Peru and both sites’ location near fertile regions. Pikillacta also has a hierarchal arrangement that is very transparent: there are 2 large patios with their respective niched halls, then smaller plazas and patios elsewhere, which may have been used to give a similar representation of elitism as the public baths in Roman cities or colonies.

Pikillacta

http://adventureperupath.com/data/images1/pikillacta2.jpg

(accessed January 30, 2013).

Pikillacta
(note wall remnants)

http://images.travelpod.com/tw_slides/ta00/b56/104/sicht-auf-pikillacta-pisac.jpg

(accessed January 30, 2013)

Pikillacta underwent an expansion, perhaps from an expansion of the Wari empire (similar to the expansion of the Roman Empire), that was abandoned.

Overall, more is known of Thamugadi than Pikillacta, which means more interpretation is necessary to determine Pikillacta’s true function. Despite this, both sites serve a purpose in revealing their respective cultures and empires.  

That's all for now!

I'm off.

Trip to Rome...Virtually

I have never been to Rome but I always wanted to visit the city and take in the sites. As part of an assignment for my Histories of Architecture and Urbanism course, I had to visit Rome virtually. To accomplish this, I used a travel guide (Rome Walking Tour) provided by tripadvisor and Google Maps. Also, for the added benefit of seeing a seamless, full panorama view of the sites in Rome, I used ItalyGuides.it's interactive  map of Rome. 

As there are 22 attractions on this tour, I will not go over all of them (despite how incredible they are), but highlight the ones that are architecturally significant and interested me the most.

The first stop on the tour was St. Peter's Basilica, a truly beautiful monument that seems to be a blend of Greek and Roman architecture, especially with pediments, arches, relief sculptures, and the Roman script running across the entablature. The basilica has a grand entryway with colonnades extending along the sides and branching out like circular wings to accept a procession. 

The passetto de Borgo was another interesting site. This is actually a bridge that popes could use to run from St. Peter's to the safety of the fortress-like Castel Sant'Angelo in times of battles. This long bridge is rather narrow and is similar to the Roman's aqueducts, with the arches spaced out along the bridge. 

The passetto de Borgo

http://rometour.org/corridore-corridori-di-borghi-rome.html

(accessed January 23, 2013)

I also visited the Pantheon, a marvel of architecture that takes a circle and square and melds them together. My first impression of this building was that it was a Greek temple because of the entrance. Then I noticed the Roman alterations: the scripture along the entablature, and of course the dome. 

Further along the tour is the Roman Forum, the heart of Rome. Here it is easy to understand the different elevations of the topography in Rome. Located in a valley beside Capitoline Hill, the Forum consists the relics of the regia (royal residency), temples, basilica, senate house and the still-standing and magnificent, Septimius Severus Arch. The Forum, as the guidebook describes, is a central area of "political, judicial, and religious rituals." Roman life centered around this area. The Romans also created a processional path to follow into the Forum (from the Coliseum). Despite the fact that most of the buildings are no longer standing, one look from beside the Septimius Severus Arch over the Forum area reveals how interconnected Rome is. 

The Roman Forum

http://www.rome.net/roman-forum

(accessed January 23, 2013)

The final attraction was the Coliseum, which is one processional walk away from the Forum. Here the melding of Roman and Greek architecture is visible in the columns, capitals and arches. Inside, there were gladiatorial fights, naval battles, and many other spectacles to entertain the empire. Its walls are somewhat crumbled but still exemplify the largest and most famous amphitheatre by the Roman Empire. 

The Coliseum

http://www.theaussienomad.com/featured-photos/the-colosseum-iconic-rome/

(accessed January 23, 2013)

All of the sites in the guidebook were given a brief historical background, but it is necessary to see (even virtually) most of them to understand their importance in the city and its architecture. Nevertheless, the guide took me through the narrow, twisting, and thoroughly confusing streets of Rome; up and down hills and into neighbourhoods where the buildings were meshed together. I saw the city's organic nature and how it once was and is today with modern incorporations. 

This virtual tour was amazing and eyeopening. One day I hope that I have the opportunity to visit Rome and that my fellow bloggers and readers will too. 

Until next time!

I'm off. 

Welcome to the ride

Cities have always interested me. The architecture of cities, their history and designs have made cities what they are today and part of this comes from referring to other cultures and their monuments as a guide. The Romans looked to the Greeks, and the rest of the world looked to Rome because of their marvels. In cities such as Washington D.C. and Paris, both Greek and Roman styles have been incorporated into the cities.

I have been fortunate enough to visit both cities and see first-hand the monuments that have become famous. Of the two, D.C. intrigued me the most with its style and architecture and made me far more interested in the design of cities.

By looking at cities and their architecture, stories, secrets and history are all revealed and show the marvels carved in stone or hidden behind friezes, façades, and sculptures.

I want to discover all the architecture, urbanism, and history that cities have to offer. The journey from each culture and the cities that they have created has just begun.