The architecture of Greece was essentially Doric. The Ionic was an
exotic in Athens and the Corinthian was more Roman than Grecian and
found no place in the Parthenon. There is a total of one hundred and
eight columns in the building, and of these all on the exterior and all
in the east room, one hundred and four in number, are Doric, while the
four in the west room are Ionic.
Taste varies in the beauty of architecture as well as in art generally.
Some admire the Gothic cathedrals of Europe, others admire the Taj Mahal
in India, and still others prefer the temples of Japan; but to those who
admire the architecture of the Greeks and the Romans, the Parthenon is
the most beautiful building in the world. Regardless, however, of what
may be thought of the beauty of its architecture, it is the most
perfect.
The age of Pericles has been known through the centuries as the "Golden
Age of Greece," but the judgment of time has forced us to the conclusion
that it was also the golden age of the world as far as the beauty of
architecture and sculptural art is concerned.
There is no more intriguing part of the whole narrative of the Parthenon
than this story of the subtlety of the Greeks in overcoming optical
illusions and neutralizing differences in distance.
Perhaps the most important, certainly the most prominent, of the
refinements of the Parthenon is the curvature of the horizontal lines.
It is not true, as some textbooks have it, that there is no straight
line in the Parthenon. There are a number of them, but all of these
straight lines are vertical. What should be said is that there are no
straight horizontal lines in the Parthenon.
Another refinement used by the Greeks in adding to the beauty of the
Parthenon relates to the columns. The visitor is certain to be impressed
by the softness of the Doric columns. This is especially true of those
of the Naos where their proximity to each other emphasizes their beauty
as they are caught banked against each other. When thus seen all other
columns fail by comparison and seem as stiff as pokers. This quality of
softness is given them by the fact that all columns, both in the Naos
and on the exterior of the building, are different in diameter from
those beside them and all are also spaced differently.
Still another refinement pertaining to the columns is technically known
as entasis, which is that quality which gives to them their beautiful
symmetry.
In discussing the columns in relation to their softness it was suggested
that they be seen banked against each other. In the discovery of their
symmetrical beauty, however, they should be seen singly. The column
apparently rises from the floor at its largest diameter and gradually
diminishes in a beautifully fluted shaft, having the very breath of
symmetry in every line to the top. That is the way it appears; but, as a
matter of fact, if the column had been constructed as it actually looks,
then, instead of seeming beautifully symmetrical, because of an optical
illusion, it would have appeared concave at a point just below the
center of the column. Knowing this from experience, the Greeks filled in
just enough to correct the results of the optical illusion and the
column in reality is bulged near the center.
It has been noted that the first sight of the Parthenon usually inspires
the visitor with a sense of its strength and stability. This effect is
produced by another of the subtleties of the Greeks in approaching
perfection in the Parthenon. Only one with technical knowledge would
ever suspect that its columns and walls are other than perpendicular;
yet, with the exception of the transverse wall which divides the cella
into its two rooms, all of them are inclined toward the center. If all
were projected on their axes, they would meet in a cluster five
thousand, eight hundred and fifty-six feet above the base of the temple.
One of the major problems that confronted the builders of the Parthenon
at Nashville related to the arrangement of the columns of the Naos.
Prior to the research work in connection with the Nashville
reproduction, the preponderance of authority favored the theory that the
Doric columns of the Naos were monoliths. This matter was settled
definitely by the work done by Mr. William Bell Dinsmoor, of New York,
who represented the builders in the archaeological end of the work.
As has been said, nothing remained of the interior of the original
Parthenon after the explosion of 1687 except the floor and fragments of
the walls. One of these fragments happened to be in the end of the
building in the southeast corner of the Naos. Sticking in it, Mr.
Dinsmoor discovered a small piece of the architrave and a discoloration
of the wall revealing where the remainder had been. This discovery fixed
the fact of an architrave and, following very closely, the further fact
that there were columns superimposed on each other with an architrave
between.
The architecture of the Parthenon will always carry with it elements of
the mystical and the mysterious to modern minds, accustomed as they are
to the solution of engineering problems by rule. The more the Parthenon
is considered, the more interesting it seems.
[Illustration: Floor of Treasury or West Room Showing Arrangement of
Ionic Columns and Figures from Elgin Marbles of Iris and Heracles]