The Arch of Gavi, located along the ancient Via Postumia in Verona,
just outside the walls of the Roman city, is a very rare case of an
honorary and monumental arch for private use in Roman architecture. In
fact, it was built around the middle of the 1st century in honor of the
Gavia family.
During the Renaissance, it was one of the most
valuable antiquities of Veronese, also due to the presence of the
signature of Vitruvius, which recalls the famous Roman architect, author
of the treatise "On Architecture". The monument was then described by
humanists and antiquarians, reproduced in detail and studied in
proportions and decorations, finally taken as a model by architects and
artists such as Palladio, Sangallo, Serlio, Falconetto, Sanmicheli, as
well as Bellini and Mantegna. He had a great influence, in particular,
on Veronese art, since the general scheme for the construction of
portals, altars and chapels in the main churches of Verona was copied.
The arch no longer stands in its original place, as it was
demolished by French military engineers in 1805, however, numerous
reliefs previously made made it possible to re-arrange it by anastilosis
and restore it in 1932, when it was transferred to the small square of
Castelvecchio, where it is located Today.
The Arch of Gavi was commissioned by the Gavi family to the architect
Vitruvio Cerdone at the end of the reign of Augustus or, at the latest,
in the very first years of the reign of Tiberius, that is, in the first
half of the 1st century. Originally interpreted as a funerary monument
or cenotaph due to its location on the via dei sepolcri, its function
was most likely the same as that of many other provincial arches, i.e.
as a symbolic monument of municipal freedoms, which was customarily
erected on occasion, is of great importance for the city.
Erected
along the Via Postumia as an isolated monument, it was later stripped of
its decorative elements [6] and included in the new city walls built,
starting from the 12th century, along the Adighetto depression, from the
present Ponte Aleardi to the fortification that once stood in place of
Castelvecchio: therefore, the arch changed its function and began to be
used as a city gate with the name of Porta di San Zeno. During the
Scaligerian Signoria, it was included in the defensive system of
Castelvecchio, built in the second half of the fourteenth century, so
much so that one side was partly built into the clock tower and the wall
supported the wall, the walkway of which passed over the ancient
monument. In the inner compartment there was even a place for a guard
post. The sacrifice of some parts of the crowning of the monument,
necessary for a more effective defensive arrangement of the patrol
route, is associated with this change in purpose and a number of
transformations.
Only during the reign of His Serene Highness,
who financed the construction of the Venetian walls, did the building
finally lose its defensive function and city gates, remaining, however,
an obligatory passage along the axis leading from the new gates of the
Palio to the heart of Venice. city . In 1550, the Venetian Republic
gave the area around the building to private individuals, including two
shops that sprang up inside. The new owner decided to free the monument
by demolishing the medieval walls and the huts leaning against them,
finally building their houses at a respectful distance from the arch.
In 1805, during the Napoleonic occupation, French military engineers
issued a decree and carried out the dismantling of the monument for
reasons of military security and viability: then the arch was carefully
examined with all its stone elements and decorations, so that its
subsequent reconstruction could be carried out. was dismantled and the
blocks were initially left in Piazza Cittadella, where they were damaged
and removed, and finally were safely placed in the arches of the Arena.
On the other hand, the basement part of the structure was not removed as
it had been buried for centuries and therefore did not impede
circulation. In addition, the Veronese architect Giuseppe Barbieri
commissioned in 1812 all the individual stone blocks modeled in wood on
a reduced scale, after which he reassembled the miniature arch with
great care: the model now kept in the archaeological museum at the
Romana Theater would have been particularly valuable. for future
restoration work.
The hypothesis of its restoration was first put
forward in 1920 by the monument inspector Antonio Avena, even though the
proposal caused controversy regarding the site of its restoration and
the accepted restoration methodology. After many years of proposals, it
was decided to reassemble it by anastilosis, place it in the square next
to Castelvecchio and integrate the missing parts. The work was
authorized in 1931, followed by Antonio Avena and Carlo Anti, and the
missing attic was redesigned by Ettore Fagiuoli, who based on drawings
by Andrea Palladio and studies carried out before being dismantled in
1805. the arch was finally opened on October 28, 1932, as part of the
tenth anniversary celebrations of the March on Rome.
During some
work at the foot of the monument, which began in 2011, the so-called
House of Castelvecchio was finally discovered, the best preserved
element of which, a polychrome mosaic floor with a geometric decorative
motif, was placed in the Boggiana Room of the cathedral. Museum of
Castelvecchio.
Client
It is highly probable that Verona was
the birthplace of the most famous Veronese family of the Roman era, the
Gavia family, famous at that time in other Italian cities. The names of
some members of the family can be found engraved on the loggia of the
Roman theater at Verona, and in an inscription that recalls that a
member of the Gavia family, in his will, ensured the construction of the
aqueduct; the Gavi arch itself takes its name from the Veronese family
who erected it, as evidenced by the dedicatory inscription CURATORES
L[ARUM] V[ERONENSIUM IN HONOREM ...] GAVI CA... DECURIONUM DECREE.
On the pedestals of the niches that originally held the statues of
the patrons, the names of four members of the Gavia family were
indicated: the names still read are those of Gaius Gavio Strabo, Marco
Gavio Macrone (both sons of Gaius Gavio) and Gavia, daughter of Marco
Gavio; instead, the fourth name was lost. However, the almost complete
loss of the main inscription on the frieze of the entablature does not
allow us to know who financed the construction of the arch, whether it
was the town hall or, more likely, someone from the same family.
Designer
The designer of the arch left his signature on two
inscriptions on the inside of the columns, a circumstance that allows us
to recognize the name of the architect of this monument, an extremely
rare case in Roman architecture: the inscription in Latin, the
inscription L (UCIUS) VITRUVIUS L(UCI) L(IBERTUS) CERDO ARCHITECTUS. The
double signature was designed to be readable both when entering and
leaving the city, which is why the architect was so famous that the
municipality allowed or even required his double signature. The
rediscovery of the name of the Roman architect, probably thanks to
Andrea Mantegna, who reproduced the epigraph inside the Ovetari Chapel
in Padua, was an important event for Renaissance artists and architects,
also because the arch was better suited to taste and tasks. the rhythm
pursued in that period in relation to other monuments of Veronese, such
as, for example, the nearby gate of Iovia.
The architect Lucio
Vitruvio Cerdone, as Cerdone's name indicates, was a Greek slave freed
by a Roman citizen named Lucio Vitruvio. According to various scholars,
the noble Vitruvius could remember Vitruvius, the architect and author
of treatises, who lived in the time of Julius Caesar and died at a ripe
old age under the reign of Augustus, the author of a treatise in ten
books on architecture, who during the Renaissance gained great fame and
who, therefore, attracted numerous scientists to a thorough analysis of
Veronese's tissue. Therefore, it is hypothesized that Vitruvius Cerdone
could be a slave freed by the most famous of the architects of Ancient
Rome, also taking into account the fact that the architect of the Gavi
arch applies various fundamental theoretical provisions of the Vitruvian
treatise: ordinatio, which would be a rational subordination of
individual parts, with exact drawing of each stone block; dispositio,
i.e. the interconnection of individual parts in relation to the whole
structure with the help of geometric drawings in plan and at height at
the design stage and a marking system to guide the execution stages;
symmetry, i.e., a system of proportional relationships that affects the
structure on all scales, from the widest architectural form to the
detailed decorative apparatus, and which is based on the module.
The Arch of Gavi was erected outside the city walls, at the
intersection of the Via Postumia and the probable boundary of Pomeria,
the outer boundary of the city, which must have passed through a natural
valley dug out in ancient times by the Adige River, dividing the
alluvial terrace on which the Roman Verona from the countryside.
Therefore, it was located in the suburbs, close to the place where the
Via Gallica joins the Postumia, and about 550 meters from the Porta
Borsari gate.
The position attributed to him the dual function of
anticipating the city gates, on the one hand, and the monumental
entrance to the burial ground that arose along the road, on the other.
The location in which it was built made it a picturesque backdrop and an
element of caesura between town and country: in fact, emerging from the
countryside, it had as its backdrop the city walls and the monumental
hill of San Pietro, on which stood the city's theater and a pagan
temple.
The quadrilateral plan and the width of the arches can
confirm that it was almost certainly at the crossroads of two paths. In
addition to the passage of the Via Postumia through the main façade,
which is 12 Roman feet wide and allows the passage of two carts, there
was therefore an axis of the road, perpendicular to the first, which
crossed the building along the secondary façade. In this case, the
actual width of the arches is only 9 feet, a typical size for secondary
roads, and the paving must be of packed earth or gravel, as opposed to
paving along the main axis.
This secondary route was probably
part of the city's commuter road network, which in the area was the
protagonist of building expansion beyond the walls, as evidenced by the
discovery near the original position of the cathedral's dome arch.
Castelvecchio. The fact that it was located at one of the closest points
in Postumia to the banks of the Adige also suggests that the extension
of this minor road to the northwest did not end in a river, but
continued by a stone or wooden bridge or through a ferry system right at
the present Castelvecchio bridge. A more direct connection would thus be
possible between the two suburban areas located on opposite banks of the
Adige, but above all it would allow the Via Claudia Augusta, which came
from the Adige valley, to be a secondary road to the main one, which
provided the crossing on the Lapideus bridge, thus avoiding the entrance
to the city.
The arch was demolished by the Napoleons in 1805 and
only rebuilt in 1932, no longer in its original location where it would
have interfered with traffic, but in a small square nearby, next to
Castelvecchio. The place where the arch originally stood can still be
identified thanks to the marble rectangle visible on the carriageway in
front of the castle.
The Arch of Gavi, characterized by great structural simplicity, is a
rectangular tetrapylon with an arched opening on each side, built on two
main fronts. Four pylons have an elongated rectangular shape and
mixed-linear profiles, as they are designed according to piers, columns
and wall cladding.
The foundation of the building consisted of
four brick pillars lined with thick layers of lime mortar; these pylons
expanded in depth due to displacement, forming a single foundation slab.
The connection between the foundations and the overlying pylons was
carried out through eutheria, i.e. the foundations of limestone blocks,
which therefore did not differ either in material or in size from the
blocks used in the rest of the above-ground structure. Euinteria
protruded from the ground to a third of its height and was therefore
visible.
The main elevations are divided into three vertical
bands by four almost open Corinthian columns resting on a very high
plinth. Two central columns, connected by an entablature and a pediment
at the top, forming a kind of aedicule, limit the main arch on both
sides, which is characterized by an archivolt with three ribbons,
resting on two Corinthian columns, decorated on the outside with
sculpted candelabra. with plant motifs. Instead, there are two high and
narrow niches in the two extreme strips of the main facade: they are
2.50 m high, 0.98 m wide and 0.68 m deep, characterized by a high
pedestal and a triangular pediment. From above, albeit heavily worn, two
folders with shelves are still visible. Finally, these two external
partitions were closed at the top with decorated stripes between the
capitals, possibly with a double relief garland, unfortunately lost.
The two smaller sides are in turn flanked by the outer columns of
the longer sides, as they are at the corners of the structure and face
both elevations. While almost all Roman arches have a blank façade on
the side, in this case there is a secondary arch consisting of an
archivolt with two bands mounted on a simple support. Above the arch,
the structure is further facilitated by a window surrounded by simple
stucco.
The inside of the arch has a flat coffered ceiling, so
the barrel vault typical of Roman arches is so absent that one might
assume a mixture of the Hellenistic tetrapylon forms with the classical
Roman arch. One of the best-preserved chests is decorated in the center
with a casing with the face of a Gorgon, surrounded by four rose windows
surrounded by a row of small shelves. Thus the Roman monument is
characterized by a rich appearance, determined by the presence of this
stone coffered ceiling, as well as the character of the Corinthian order
and the variety of pediments, whose tympanums were once surmounted by a
low metal decoration, and, finally, the presence of candelabra pillars,
ornate archivolts, corbels and festoons. In four niches there were also
statues of the characters of the Gavia family, mentioned in the
inscriptions engraved under the niches themselves. Proportions,
architectural motifs, figurative and decorative elements, combined
together, give the arch an appearance of slender elegance, measured
diversity and richness.
The monument has a height of 12.69
meters, a length of 10.96 meters on the larger side and 6.02 meters on
the shorter side. The main arch, with a span of 8.40 x 3.48 m, made it
possible to pass the Via Postumia, and under a smaller arch, with a span
of 5.50 x 2.65 m, a secondary path branched off to the river, where the
road was crossed by the Adige approximately on the bridge of
Castelvecchio.
The monument was built from blocks of white Veronese limestone,
probably from the quarries of nearby Valpantena, carefully leveled and
stacked on top of each other. Therefore, it was built using the
construction technique of the square work of the isodome, where the four
lightweight walls of the four central arches perform a static function,
and the Corinthian columns perform a decorative function rather than a
proper static one.
The pedestals consist of four rows of
rectangular blocks (one row for the base, two for the base of the
pedestal and one for the end frame), and the central part, corresponding
to the height of the columns, consists of eleven courses, finally three
make up the entablature. However, the number of rows that made up the
crown of the structure is unknown, since the original blocks were lost,
and the current ones were added during the re-arrangement and
restoration of the monument based on ancient reliefs. These rows of
stones vary slightly in size, but each row has the same height around
the entire perimeter of the structure. Only some decorative elements,
the production of which was more difficult, in particular the capitals
of the columns, the capitals of the pillars of the main arches and the
kokoshnik folders, were obtained from solid blocks.
Corinthian
columns are adjacent to the walls of the structure for a quarter of the
section. The different drums are alternately insulated or derived from
the same block that makes up the wall, thus forming a very strong whole.
The individual drums were connected vertically with pins of various
types, and horizontally to the wall with metal staples 2 cm square and
18 cm long. Other small decorative details were eventually completed
after the blocks were placed.
Thus, the construction technique
used in the construction of the arch reveals a clear correspondence
between architectural and decorative forms and precise technical
execution, therefore, each detail was predetermined by the architect
himself, which is also evidenced by the presence of markings on most of
the blocks that make up the structure, which allowed accurate the
location of individual blocks in the body of the structure during the
construction site. These abbreviations were found on the hidden surfaces
of the stone blocks by the architect Barbieri in 1812 after the French
demolished the arch. The meticulous research work of the Veronese
architect leads us to the knowledge of a rather limited number of
abbreviations placed on the blocks that form the pedestal and
entablature, partly lost, perhaps due to various degradation phenomena
that destroyed them over the centuries. the large number of acronyms
found on the central body even allows us to understand the logic behind
this encryption system. Each of the eleven stone rows that made up the
dais was designated by a letter of the alphabet, albeit with variations:
in fact, A and B were replaced, perhaps for ease of engraving, by the
letter X; the C was engraved horizontally to better distinguish it from
the G; so was the letter I, engraved horizontally to distinguish it from
the number 1. Each individual row, in turn, was encrypted with a series
of numbers. Separate from this system was instead the numbering of the
hewn stones of the archivolts of the main and secondary arches. Thus,
with the help of a letter and a number, it was possible to accurately
determine the location of each block in the building.
In 1931, the restoration work was authorized by the Ministry, and the
following year, Antonio Avena and Carlo Anti, artistic director and
archaeological consultant, respectively, and the engineers Zordan and
Tromba were the leaders of the work. The chosen project was to recompose
the monument in the small area where it still stands today, through
restoration by anastylosis and reintegration, backed up by numerous
previous studies, the ancient block marking system and grappa traces. To
complete the arch of elements that have been lost by now, it was decided
to fill it with stone blocks similar to the previous ones in shape and
material, but by treating the surfaces with light embossing and
reproducing the decorative elements in a simplified form. forms. For the
attic, the technique performed was somewhat different, as the surfaces
were worked with a larger hammer, and the frames were only profiled so
that the top of the monument, which had been almost completely rebuilt,
appeared rough and unfinished. to make it easier to identify its other
nature. In fact, there were not enough original elements left to
indicate its shape and proportions, and Ettore Fagiuoli, who designed
it, had to take as his model the reliefs returned by Andrea Palladio,
Giuseppe Barbieri and Carlo Ederle. The last aspect, given the rigorous
methodology adopted, is not much different from the primitive.
The reconstruction, in a different location from the original,
unfortunately entailed the demolition of part of the Castelvecchio house
in order to build a new concrete foundation. The height was reinforced
with iron keys where it was not possible to reuse the ancient grappa,
and for the roof a reinforced concrete slab construction was chosen,
waterproofed by the asphalt layer. At the base of the monument, a
section of the Roman paved road was finally reconstructed.
The
southern facade of the original Roman building, located in the direction
of Corso Cavour and corresponding to the forum, has come down to us in
its most complete form. In fact, a good part of the pedestal has been
preserved, where, however, the end frame, especially on the outside, is
very worn out, and the middle body, where, however, the columns suffered
serious losses: from the left, only part of the remnants of the base;
the left middle instead lost its base, but retained the shaft, where,
however, the grooves are greatly eroded, and the capital, essentially
devoid of decoration; the right median still keeps both the base and the
stem intact; finally, the right corner column preserved several badly
damaged drums and only part of the base. The epigraph at the base of the
niche, the right pillar with a capital and the entablature of the niche
itself, as well as a scroll, but without a shelf, have been preserved in
the inter-column facing on the right. Instead, all of these elements are
heavily blurred, if not missing, in the left intercolumn. In the arch,
the capstone with two adjacent hewn stones is heavily eroded and
difficult to read, and is part of the decoration of the left pier. In
the upper part there are several fragments of an architrave (located
above the space between the columns of two columns), small remains of a
frieze with engraved letters, and a heavily damaged section of the
cornice and pediment.
The façade that faces the Adige today, and
which originally faced the countryside, is less well preserved. In this
case, the actual pedestal is largely restored, while in the middle case,
only the middle column on the right has a shaft made up almost entirely
of the original drums, even if the grooves and base are badly damaged.
However, a part of the base, some elements of the shaft and capitals,
always heavily destroyed by erosion, have been preserved from the right
corner column. In this facade, both tables contain an inscription, and
in the right niche and the left column, and the entablature, and the
pediment are in good condition. In addition, almost all the blocks that
make up the two inter-column facings have been preserved. In the arch,
the abutments retained the original blocks, but they were badly damaged,
and most of the decorations were lost, as were the capitals, and only
three original hewn stones remained from the archivolt.
On the
small eastern façade, some blocks of the wall, part of the window frame
and part of the hewn blocks of the archivolt have been preserved, and on
the small western façade, both the impost blocks of the archivolt and
six of its hewn blocks, as well as part of the window casing, have been
preserved. Finally, from the three large slabs that made up the ceiling,
fragments with corresponding decorations have been preserved.