- Description
-
- Creator(s)
- Thomas Girtin (1775-1802) after Charles-Louis Clérisseau (1721-1820)
- Title
-
- Rome: The Temple of Saturn, Known as the Temple of Concord
- Date
- 1796 - 1797
- Medium and Support
- Graphite, pen and ink and brush and ink on wove paper
- Dimensions
- 39.8 × 54.4 cm, 15 ⅝ × 21 ⅜ in
- Object Type
- Outline Drawing; Work from a Known Source: Foreign Master
- Subject Terms
- Italian View: Ancient Rome
-
- Collection
- Versions
-
Rome: The Temple of Saturn, with the Arch of Septimius Severus
(TG0894)
- Catalogue Number
- TG0893
- Girtin & Loshak Number
- 343 as 'The Temple of Concord, Rome'; '1799–1800'
- Description Source(s)
- Viewed in 2001 and 2018
Provenance
John Henderson (1764–1843); then by descent to John Henderson II (1797–1878); bequeathed to the Museum, 1878
Bibliography
Binyon, 1898–1907, no.103 as 'Remains of the Temple of Concord, Rome'; Wilton, 1984a, p.11
Place depicted
Revisions & Feedback
The website will be updated from time to time and, when changes are made, a PDF of the previous version of each page will be archived here for consultation and citation.
Please help us to improve this catalogue
If you have information, a correction or any other suggestions to improve this catalogue, please contact us.
About this Work
This view of the ruined Temple of Saturn in the Roman Forum, with the Arch of Septimius Severus beyond, is based on an etching by Domenico Cunego (1727–1803) that, in turn, reproduced a composition by Charles-Louis Clérisseau (1721–1820) (see the source image above). The image, which forms a pair with another pen and ink drawing, The Temple of Augustus at Pula in Istria (TG0896), is after a print that is titled The Temple of Concord, though it actually shows the Temple of Saturn. The view also includes the three surviving columns of the Temple of Vespasian and the dome of the church of Santi Luca e Martina, though Clérisseau gives almost as much space to the humble buildings that had grown up amongst the ruins themselves. Girtin separates the dome from the three columns to create a more legible composition, but, apart from compressing the dimensions of his copy and moving the two monks to the centre, he otherwise follows Clérisseau’s original very closely. Thus, unlike in the slightly later watercolour version of the same artist’s view of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina (TG0888), Girtin retains the complex contemporary genre scene that plays itself out amongst the ruins of ancient Rome.
Like its pair, The Temple of Augustus at Pula, which also employs a mix of brushwork with pen and ink to reinforce a highly detailed pencil drawing, this work comes from the collection of Girtin’s early patron John Henderson (1764–1843). Later versions of Clérisseau’s works by Girtin were made in watercolours for sale on the open market. However, as with as many as twenty or so copies after the work of contemporary topographers and landscape artists from earlier generations commissioned by Henderson, this example was presumably worked from a print in the patron’s collection. The majority of the resulting copies are in watercolours, so they follow the pattern of the bulk of the work produced by Girtin and Joseph Mallord William Turner (1775–1851) at the home of another early collector, Dr Thomas Monro (1759–1833); namely, the artists provided the patron with more finished versions of material that he already had access to, either as sketches or as reproductive prints. The two pen and ink drawings under consideration here are rather different, since the outline, however complex, is still no more finished than its source. It may be that as with Dartford High Street (TG0843), the outline was conceived as the first stage in the production of a watercolour (TG0844), and Girtin did indeed produce a carefully worked version of part of this view at a later date (TG0894). However, the more likely rationale behind the work’s production is that, as has been seen in other cases, Henderson appreciated Girtin’s sketches in their own right, and it appears that he commissioned such views as examples of the young artist’s expertise with the pencil, pen and brush, much as others collected the sketches of earlier revered practitioners. Overlaying images of the drawing and its source illustrates how close a copy it is, but also shows that it was made freehand rather than being traced, and there is therefore still much to be admired in Girtin’s inventive and fluent use of line. Perhaps aided by the detailed study of the entablature of the Temple of Saturn that Girtin made at the same time (TG0895), the depiction of the ruins, in particular, provides an object lesson in how, in the hands of a fine draughtsman, a line in pencil or ink has the capacity to be both decorative and descriptive, and the drawing was presumably deemed to be deserving of a place in the connoisseur’s collection as an example of the artist’s skill.
On a technical note, the paper historian Peter Bower has identified the support employed by Girtin as a white wove drawing paper, probably manufactured by James Whatman the Younger (1741–98) (Bower, Report). It is the same support that is employed in other Henderson commissions, including this work’s pair The Temple of Augustus at Pula (TG0896).
Image Overlay
1797 - 1798
The Temple of Augustus at Pula in Istria
TG0896
1799 - 1800
Rome: The Temple of Antoninus and Faustina
TG0888
1795 - 1796
Dartford High Street
TG0843
1795 - 1796
Dartford High Street
TG0844
1799 - 1800
Rome: The Temple of Saturn, with the Arch of Septimius Severus
TG0894
1797 - 1798
Rome: Study of the Entablature of the Temple of Saturn
TG0895
1797 - 1798
The Temple of Augustus at Pula in Istria
TG0896