РАНОРИМСКОТО НАСЛЕДСТВО И ПОТЕНЦИЈАЛНИТЕ ВЛИЈАНИЈА ВРЗ СТАНБЕНАТА И САКРАЛНАТА АРХИТЕКТУРА ВО ДОЦНОРИМСКИТЕ УРБАНИ СРЕДИНИ НА ТЕРИТОРИЈАТА НА РЕПУБЛИКА МАКЕДОНИЈА
SUMMARY: EARLY ROMAN HERITAGE AND POTENTIAL INFLUENCE ON THE RESIDENTIAL AND SACRAL ARCHITECTURE WITHIN THE LATE ROMAN URBAN SETTLEMENTS ON THE TERRITORY OF THE REPUBLIC OF MACEDONIA
Архитектурата е рефлексија на секое општество и предмет на постојана промена и еволуција. Секоја покрупна промена во општествениот, стопанскиот и политичкиот живот, потенцијално се манифестира врз животната средина на луѓето. Геолокацијата на населбите и нивното архитектонско и инфраструктурно уредување се редовно подредени на микрорегионалните геоморфолошки и еколошки карактеристики (клима, релјеф, хидрографија, почва, ресурси, итн.). Сепак, не треба да се занемари и потребата од имплементирање на принципите и естетските вредности на времето, просторот и културните текови во кои таа архитектура е изградена и се развива. Оправданоста за еден ваков труд е поткрепена со недостатокот на студија која, на едно место, ќе ги собере досегашните сознанија за развојот на урбаното уредување, резиденцијалната и сакралната архитектура во доцноримските градови. Главната цел на трудот е сублимирање на досегашните сознанија за аналогиите и потенцијалните извори на инспирација, во дел од доцноримската урбана архитектура на Балканот. Иако од исклучителна важност за истражувачкиот проблем, заради ограничениот карактер на трудот на ова место нема простор за подетална евалуација на степенот на „надворешни влијанија“ во креирањето на локалниот уметнички вкус, врз естетските квалитети на архитектонската декорација и во обликувањето на јавните градби. Тука не треба да се очекува ниту детална архитектонска анализа ниту некој посериозен исчекор, надвор од резултатите од досегашните продлабочени истражувања.
The influences in the architecture in the Central Balkan area during the Roman period are divided as similarly as in the wider Mediterranean region, on Roman-Latin, Oriental-Roman and on architecture based on the strong local Hellenistic tradition. During the early Roman period the main investor and commissioner, and the leader in the development in the field of architecture were the state and the Roman citizens. In this period, no matter how strong the influence from the west was, in the central northern part of the province of Macedonia it was not accepted and developed as such.
In the period that follows, we can trace a process of development of a relatively unified local Hellenistic-Roman form. An explicit and very obvious example of this synthesis is the residential architecture dating from 4th to 5th century. Since then until the end of Antiquity, beside some very weak and short-lasting manifestations from `western` origin, the entire architectural heritage is developing similarly like that in the Orient, with clear local manifestations and variables of the primary idea. Very often, the ideas and the solutions are bold and original, but then again, far from any high artistic value. The influence of the metropolitan art on the architectural decoration is seen on the stone carvings and the mosaics. During the late Roman period, many buildings are a manifestation of the personal interests and the power of the aristocracy and the clergy. This process is consistent with the economic strength of both entities. However, maybe the key reason, along with the economy, is the tradition and the earlier contacts throughout the Mediterranean. The above mentioned comes as a conclusion because all the knowledge and technology needed (from engineering and artistic point of view) considering the massive construction interventions such as building of public buildings, aqueducts, fortification systems, required high level of masonry, craftsmanship, and taste of artistic decoration, and they are commonly connected with certain and specialized engineers, master builders and workshops. The possibility that the local masters who worked on those buildings, who had had their education and/or training somewhere out of their place of residence and who brought some of that experience back, should definitely not be forgotten as a possible cause and interpreted as influence in the formation of the local architectural and/or artistic expression. Also, always the taste and the wishes of the commissioner and his/her personal and professional background. All these previously mentioned factors manifested in the locally developed architecture. The existence of recognized local workshops, highly appreciated for their artistic and technical skills, is evident. Most often building materials from the local environment are used. When it comes to the architectural decoration, materials were brought from distant places. This was a symbol of prestige manifested through even higher artistic and aesthetic values of the building. The cultural downfall that happened under the influence of many factors, reflected negatively upon the creation of regional styles, especially to those that developed during the 6th century. The second half of the century is a period when major building efforts were only those in the focus of the church and the state. This is a period when manifestations of the long-lasting development of the Roman building technology are still introduced, no matter their number. After the middle of the 6th century when the early Byzantine society started to show signs of serious downfalls, the architecture became a mere shadow and pale improvisation of something that used to be the opulence of a building in style and materials. During the last decades of the 6th century, only rare examples of grand architecture on the territory of the central Balkans exist, just an echo of past processes of progress in the architecture in a world that was getting smaller.
It is relatively ungrateful to identify certain and definite directions influences in the architecture, first because of that some manifestations may be and probably were just an adaptation to the needs of the local population within an existing context in time. Also, the question of whether the constructive and decorative similarities in the architecture (although geographically far apart) are a result of traveling masters, craftsmen and artist or they are simply a different phenomenon. A riddle for itself is the path throughout which an idea spread and whether the change is more natural than a thoughtful and intentional process? Additionally, we would mention the phenomenon of subdivision and visible profanity evident in the living space inside the settlements and the changes in the culture of living throughout the Mediterranean during the late antiquity. Rising all these questions, we can simply say that this is a problem that needs a deeper research with additional knowledge and analysis on the topic, one that exceeds the limits of a paper like this. Actually, these are issues that should be investigated and solved separately throughout a research on every single excavated building so far. To have a more balanced view of the topic, some statistic data and analysis should verify how large is the research subject compared to the total number of monuments under analysis. This is the reason, why, we used only data from earlier large-scale researches. In the end, why do we ask for analogies and transition of an idea (or influence) so more often, rather than accepting the manifestations as a normal process, a natural process of evolution of the architecture everywhere based on pure rationality, power and struggle for prestige? Considering this, the questions about potential influences should be somewhere lower on the list of priorities for the researchers.