A Comparison of Classical Greek and Classical Roman Architecture

It is difficult to compare Classical Greek architecture with Classical Roman Architecture. We have many examples of Roman architecture. Aqueducts, temples, bathhouses, and arenas still exist today. But most Greek architecture from that time period was made of wood, clay, or unfired bricks, so the only existing examples are the temples or public buildings.

Greek temples are renowned for their colonnades, sculpture filled pediments, and low sloping roofs. The roofs were typically wooden beams covered with terracotta tiles. The rest of the temple would be carved limestone, which is plentiful in Greece. Marble was expensive to move, and difficult to shape, so it was mostly used for statuary or emphasis. Many rich people would use marble for their lintels, and limestone or wood for the rest of the house.

Roman architecture took the columns of the Greeks, and added arches and domes. With the discovery of concrete, Roman masonry flourished. Concrete was easy to transport and simple to make, and once it set, could be covered by stucco or mosaic to add beauty as well as durability. Large rooms were now possible, and featured impressive domes with decorative rows of columns in front of load bearing walls. The ingenuity of the Roman architects was also shown in double glazed windows, under floor heating, and water pipes, such as have been found in the ruins of Pompeii.

The Roman's graceful arches and domes are designed to impress the viewer. Classical Greek architecture was meant to fulfill an inner aesthetic, using the same mathematical ratios as their music.