Parthenon Vs Pantheon Essay

Both the Parthenon and the Pantheon are considered architectural marvels, and are world-reknowned for their resilience both structurally and in historical and artistic significance. As iconic as they are, they have served different places in their times, and while Greek culture heavily influenced Rome, and this can be seen in the resemblances these buildings bear, there are many clear distinctions as well.

The Parthenon is a prime example both of Athenian primacy and piety. While it is unusual in that it combines elements of both Doric and Ionic styles, it remains clearly a temple, meant to honour Athena to the fullest with it's size, grand scale, and artistic masterworks - all while showcasing the wealth of Athens, and commemorating it as a suitibly lavish quasi-imperial seat (Silverman, n.d.). The depth is beautiful, what remains of the works is beautifully tooled, and the dedication to specific forms and styles in terms of which friezes are allowed where and how, …show more content…
Everything from its builder (Agrippa? Trajan? Hadrian?) to its use (Temple? Forum? Chapel?) is somewhat cobbled together. As much as the arches in the Pantheon are evenly spaced, and the building is built grand, of marble and bronze like the Parthenon, it differs substantially. Its original purpose, never as marked as the Parthenon's, has been long forgotten, seeing the building serve not as a temple but as a cultural hub. As such, it is more open. It is also built of granite and concrete, in addition to marble, as a point of both pragmatism and as a result of its scale and ambition - the rotunda needs to be made of lighter and lighter stone to not crack in on itself, and marble simply wouldn't have worked. It bears haphazard and different order schemes within it, a testament to Rome's willingness to borrow, and a marked departure from Greek consistency (Wikipedia,