- Description
-
- Creator(s)
- Thomas Girtin (1775-1802) after Giovanni Battista Piranesi (1720-1778)
- Title
-
- The Temple of Augustus at Pula in Istria
- Date
- 1797 - 1798
- Medium and Support
- Graphite and watercolour on laid paper
- Dimensions
- 28.1 × 48.4 cm, 11 ⅛ × 19 in
- Subject Terms
- Ancient Ruins
-
- Collection
- Catalogue Number
- TG0886
- Girtin & Loshak Number
- 303 as 'Tempio di Pola in Istria'; '1798–9'
- 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
Exhibition History
Manchester, 1975, no.51; London, 2002, no.63
Bibliography
Binyon, 1898–1907, no.105 as 'The Same (Ruined) Temple'; Mayne, 1949, p.96; Girtin and Loshak, 1954, p.67
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 Augustus at Pula in Istria, in modern Croatia, is based on an etching by Giovanni Battista Piranesi (1720–78) that was published in 1748 as plate twenty-one of Antichità Romane de’ Tempi della Repubblica, e de’ primi Imperatori (Roman Antiquity of the Time of the Republic and the First Emperors) (see the source image above). The etching was republished in 1765 in Archi Trionfali ed Altri Monumenti (Triumphal Arches and Other Monuments) and it may have been this version that provided Girtin with the source for his watercolour. Girtin made three watercolours from Piranesi’s etchings for Antichità Romane or its reprint, including a pair of smaller views titled The Arch of Janus (TG0885) and The Temple of Clitumnus (TG0887), but this view, together with the curious image The Bridge of Augustus at Rimini (TG0892), seems to date from slightly earlier. Temple of Augustus at Pula in Istria differs from the later versions of Piranesi’s prints in one crucial respect, however: unlike those watercolours, which appear to have been made for sale on the open market, this work was produced for Girtin’s early patron John Henderson (1764–1843), in whose collection it remained until it was bequeathed by his son to the British Museum. Henderson commissioned another image of the temple at Pula (known in Roman times as Pola) from an engraving by Domenico Cunego (1727–1803), after Charles-Louis Clérisseau (1721–1820) (TG0896). Together, the two slightly different views would have formed a fascinating contrast of styles. Thus, whilst Girtin, in what might have been a slightly earlier work, reinforced a highly detailed pencil outline of the Clérisseau composition in ink, here he used fluid washes of ink, added with a bravura despatch, to create a sketch that matches some of the bold freedom of Piranesi’s etching style. In the process, and presumably coincidentally, the result recalls the pen and brush studies of older masters such as Giovanni Battista Tiepolo (1696–1770) (see figure 1).
In the catalogue to Girtin’s bicentenary exhibition, I suggested that this work was ‘an unfinished watercolour’ (Smith, 2002b, p.89). However, in revisiting the early part of Girtin’s career, it is now clear that Henderson was sufficiently appreciative of the artist’s sketches to have commissioned a different sort of copy than the relatively verbatim versions of the architectural views of Thomas Malton the Younger (1748–1804) (for example, TG0871). Thus, in addition to rendering Piranesi’s small-scale etching as a bravura monochrome sketch, seemingly dispatched at speed on the spot, Girtin radically altered the composition. The artist thus introduced a deeper foreground, partly by adding a boldly positioned wall to the left, and he then cut the composition to the right to create a more concentrated image that ironically, with its dramatic cut-off, is closer to a characteristic Piranesi view than the more panoramic format of the original etching.
On a technical note, the paper historian Peter Bower has identified the support used by Girtin in this work as a laid cartridge paper produced by an unknown English manufacturer, and that it was worked on the wireside, where the surface is impressed with the lines of the mould used in its manufacture (Smith, 2002b, p.89; Bower, Report). This is the same paper Girtin used for Lindisfarne: The Nave and Crossing of the Priory Church (TG1108) and Rievaulx Abbey (TG1056), which can both be dated with some confidence to around 1797–98, and this is very likely to be the date of this drawing too. Girtin’s use of rough textured laid paper is entirely in keeping with the sketch-like character of the drawing, offering a further contrast with the other view of the temple made after Clérisseau (TG0896), which is painted on a smooth wove paper that is more typical of the surfaces used in the Henderson copies.
1799 - 1800
The Arch of Janus
TG0885
1799 - 1800
The Temple of Clitumnus
TG0887
1797 - 1798
The Bridge of Augustus at Rimini
TG0892
1797 - 1798
The Temple of Augustus at Pula in Istria
TG0896
1795 - 1796
London: The Royal Exchange
TG0871
1796 - 1797
Lindisfarne: The Nave and Crossing of the Priory Church
TG1108
(?) 1798
Rievaulx Abbey
TG1056
1797 - 1798
The Temple of Augustus at Pula in Istria
TG0896