The Temple of Zeus at Selinous was the first of a number of colossal

structures, in which the architectural ability of the Greeks, by that

time thoroughly schooled, sought also to develop itself in enormous

size. The hexastyle front was increased to the octastyle, thus

permitting wider dimensions of the cella, which still, however, did not

attain the greatest possible extent, the architect being unwilling to

reduce the breadth of the pteroma. The columns became even shorter and

thicker; they were less diminished and had a more delicately adjusted

entasis; the intercolumniations were increased. The separation of the

capital from the shaft by an apophyge was abandoned; the entasis was

made steeper and of a more vigorous outline. The disproportionately high

and weak triglyphs are especially characteristic of this stage of

development; with the exception of these, the entablature still

remained low and heavy. Marble came more and more into use as a

building-stone; the execution of details in stucco was rarer. The new

material did not limit the use of color, which, in place of the former

tones, became brighter--red, blue, and yellow prevailing. The most

imposing, because the best-preserved, of these colossal works is the

magnificent Temple of Pœstum, with its two stories of inner columns

partly intact. (_Fig._ 153.) The triglyphs have not as yet disappeared

from the walls of the cella, but otherwise the construction shows no

primitive traits, being fully fitted for its execution in stone.

Resembling this in many points is the Temple of Acragas, or Agrigentum,

termed that of Heracles. (_Fig._ 149.) The great Temple of Zeus of the

same city was of the most gigantic dimensions ever attempted in the

sacred architecture of the Greeks. It was also, unfortunately, even

greater than was really practicable for a trabeated construction in such

a building-material, and consequently became a monstrosity. The temple

was heptastyle, that is, had seven columns upon the front, which

rendered impossible the normal entrance in the middle. It differed still

more decidedly from other Greek temples in that the cella was not

surrounded by an open pteroma, the outstanding columns being supplanted

by a wall decorated with engaged shafts. It would be difficult to decide

whether this peculiar pseudo-peripteros owed its conformation to the

building-stone at disposal, only to be quarried in blocks too short for

the lintels of the pteroma, or whether other considerations led to this

abnormal negation of the fundamental principles of columnar

architecture, which here has no relation to the better-founded practices

of Roman builders in the application of engaged shafts. The

transformation of the pteroma made an entire change in the general

disposition of plan; but too little of the building now remains above

ground to render its arrangement certain. If door-openings be assumed at

both sides of the middle column, as in the illustration, this would have

been possible only upon the west, the middle column of the east--the

customary entrance-front--being proved by the remains to have been

engaged. It is not probable that windows existed in the wall between the

columns; the supposition is more natural that some of the side metopes

were unclosed, and provided the pteroma with sufficient daylight. This

would have been no innovation, but rather, in this case, where it was

impossible to execute the open peripteros, a return to the original

method of illumination through the interstices between the beams upon

the top of the cella wall. The before-mentioned Temple of Athene upon

the island of Ortygia is another Sicilian example belonging to this

archaic period of gigantic dimensions.

The two colossal monuments of Athens, built during the second half of

the sixth century, are more important, although the older Parthenon upon

the acropolis, if, indeed, ever completed, could not have stood longer

than half a century, and the Doric temple of Olympian Zeus was

discontinued before its construction had far advanced. A comparison of a

fragment of the earlier building with the entablature of the present

Parthenon shows how disproportionately high were the triglyphs and how

heavy and broad the tænia and regulas of the archaic period. (_Fig._

155.)

[Illustration: Fig. 155.--Entablatures of the Older and Present

Parthenon.]

[Illustration: Fig. 156.--Plan of the Temple of Zeus at Olympia.]

The exercise of the designer’s individual ability in these works, and

the hieratic retention of every constructive and æsthetic gain thus

obtained, prepared for the fullest perfection of the Doric style. The

advance was effected by a slight attenuation of the too massive columns,

a further reduction of the height of the entablature, and an increase in

the projection of the smaller decorative members. The temples built

during, or shortly after, the time of the Persian wars show the gradual

introduction of these changes. Among the Sicilian remains of this period

are the uncompleted Temple of Segesta, the so-called Temple of Concordia

at Acragas, and the six peripteral temples upon the acropolis and

eastern plateau of Selinous not previously mentioned. Among those of

Greece proper, the Temple of Athene upon Ægina and the Temple of Zeus at

Olympia (_Fig._ 156) are most prominent. The frieze of triglyphs was

omitted from the cella walls of the Temple of Ægina, but the regulas and

trunnels were retained with curious effect: it is as though the designer

were only slowly and with difficulty led to give up, one by one, the

traditions of a primitive wooden construction. The date of the building

of the Olympian temple is uncertain, but the name of its architect,

Libon, of Elis, has been handed down, with one exception the earliest

connected with Greek architecture. The recent excavations have entirely

exposed the overthrown ruins. They show that the forms of the edifice

are more primitive than would have been expected from the age in which

Pheidias completed the celebrated chryselephantine statue of the temple

deity. It is possible that the advance of the building was slow, or that

there were long interruptions of the work before its final completion.

An especially important result of the investigations is the evidence

that an enclosed ædicula for the statue of Zeus, hitherto advocated by

restorers because of the supposed opening in the roof and ceiling for

light, did not exist, the interior having been divided into three aisles

like the great Temple of Pæstum. The proportions of the peripteros were

of great vigor and beauty. It was built of poros, with the exception of

the metope reliefs upon the fronts of the cella, and the carved gutter

and roof tiles, which were of marble. This so-called poros, a stone

almost exclusively employed for the earlier buildings of the Greeks, is

a rough shell conglomerate, usually brought to a surface by a heavy

priming of stucco. The floor of the pteroma of the great temple at

Olympia was of a pebble cement, the small inner staircases of wood.

While the architecture of the Peloponnesos still retained traces of the

archaic style, the highest perfection of Doric forms was attained in

Attica, reaching its fulfilment at a time, after the Persian wars, when

the political supremacy of Athens was far greater than that ever enjoyed

by any state of the world so restricted in territory. The deserved

sovereignty of Athens over Greece, its naval power, imposing even to the

Orientals of Western Asia and Egypt, and, finally, the necessity and

opportunity of rebuilding the Attic capital after its destruction by the

Persians, before the decisive battle of Salamis, caused a monumental

rebirth of the noble city, which not only became the classic model in

those ages throughout the extent of Greece and its colonies upon distant

shores, but the highest ideal of architecture to the present day and for

the entire future of the human race. Attica was fitted to cultivate

equally the artistic peculiarities of the two branches of the Hellenic

stock, its Ionic population being intermingled, in a marked degree, with

Doric elements. It had attained the highest development of civilization,

and was the home of the most famed artists. By the taxes levied upon the

eastern mainland and the islands of the Archipelago, Athens had almost

unlimited means at its disposal. To this nature added the incomparable

marble building-material, quarried almost before the gates of the city,

which indeed possessed all the conditions requisite for the first

monumental capital of Greece and of the civilized world. Familiarity

with the Ionic style did not permit that heaviness and clumsiness of

architectural members observable upon the contemporaneous temples of the

Peloponnesos. The columns of the Temple of Ægina had been allowed a

height as great as 5.3 times their lower diameter. In the Doric

buildings of Athens this was still further increased, the so-called

Temple of Theseus having the proportion of 5.62 to 1, the Parthenon as

5.47 to 1. The diminution and entasis of the shaft were reduced to just

relations; the delicate curve of the latter, as demanded by the optical

deception it was to correct, was greatest below the half height of the

column. The channellings no longer remained segmental arcs, but received

an independently designed, elliptical profile. The echinos became

steeper, rising in an almost straight line to the firm and sharp turn

beneath the abacus. The triglyphs, returning slightly to former

proportions, became broader than those of the preceding period; smaller

members were diminished in height, but were made more projecting. The

colors of the entablature became still more intense; blue and red

predominated; green was also employed, and gilding appeared upon the

trunnels and in the beautifully composed surface patterns. Ionic

elements, almost entirely disused during the latter ages, reappeared in

very general employment, especially in the deep cofferings of the

pteroma ceiling and upon the capitals of the pilasters.

The typical monuments of this Attic Doric style are the so-called

Theseion, and the Parthenon and Propylæa of the Athenian acropolis. The

first of these buildings (_Fig._ 139) was certainly not sacred to

Theseus; its dedication is not surely known. It preceded the highest

perfection, still betraying some slight archaic influences. The

triglyphs are too high, the smaller members, notably the regulas and

trunnels, too heavy. Ionic elements are freely introduced. Besides the

coffering of the pteroma ceiling and the before-mentioned pilaster

capitals, there was an Ionic zophoros, or continuous frieze of figures,

bordered above and below by leaved cyma-mouldings and astragals, in

place of the Doric entablature usually employed, at least in part, upon

the walls of the cella. The ornamental painting was extended to the

capitals of the pteroma columns (_Fig._ 150), which bore a series of

leaves, and to the walls, the interior of the naos having been prepared

for the reception of pigments. The perfect preservation of the building

is owing to its early transformation into a Christian church.

[Illustration: Fig. 157.--Plan of the Parthenon.]

The Parthenon far surpassed the Theseion in artistic perfection; it was,

indeed, worthy the superintendence of a Pheidias. Its architect,

Ictinos, conceived his work to stand so high above contemporary

buildings that he celebrated it in an especial monograph, mentioned by

Vitruvius, though, unfortunately, not consulted by him. The dimensions

of the octastyle temple were imposing; the edge of the stylobate

measured about 30 by 68 m.; elevated upon the steep acropolis, it could

be seen from a great distance. Though its site was not limited, the

economy of space was carried to an extreme. The intercolumniations are

narrow, especially those of the front; the pteroma was thus reduced in

breadth to less than one and one half times the lower diameter of the

columns. (_Fig._ 157.) The pronaos and epinaos had no side walls, the

cella being amphiprostyle, enclosed by high grilles. The depth of these

vestibules was less than one quarter of their breadth. The remaining

interior was partitioned into two chambers of unequal size: the naos and

the opisthodomos, the latter of which served as a treasury. The naos was

divided by ranges of columns into three chief aisles, and the gallery

over the sides was carried across the nave, next to the rear wall. The

world-renowned chryselephantine statue of Athene, 12 m. high, stood

before the transverse columns, between which and the partition there was

allowed a passage, nearly equal in breadth to the side aisles. The

stairs to the gallery may, from the analogies of the great temples of

Olympia and Pæstum, be assumed to have existed at either side of the

entrance.

[Illustration: Fig. 158.--Plan and View of the Propylæa, Athens.]

The Propylæa of the Athenian acropolis, by which the architect Mnesicles

made his name immortal, were not less perfect than the Parthenon. Work

upon them was begun shortly before the completion of the latter

building, in 438 B.C., and occupied five years. Ionic members had

frequently been employed upon Doric structures, but the Propylæa offer

the first instance of a combination of the styles in almost equal

proportions: the interior of these gates was entirely Ionic, the

exterior entirely Doric. (_Figs._ 120 and 158.) Six Ionic columns bore

the famed marble ceiling of great span, while two Doric porticos formed

the fronts. The stone-cutting of all the monuments upon the Athenian

acropolis was incomparably exact and beautiful, as was the harmony of

their proportions and forms.

[Illustration: Fig. 159.--Plan of the Temple of Apollo at Bassæ.]

The Temple of Phigalia, or Bassæ, in Arcadia, though stated to have been

built by the architect of the Parthenon, shows that the perfection of

the monuments last considered was possible only upon Attic ground. The

sanctuary of Arcadia was dedicated to Apollo Epicourios in gratitude for

the deliverance of the district from the plague of 431 B.C. Its plan

(_Fig._ 159) was excessively long, having fifteen side columns, with a

hexastyle front. The elevation offers a remarkable combination of

archaic traditional forms and of exaggerated novelties. Though the three

incisions of the capital necking are peculiarly primitive, the echinos

has become even steeper than it was upon the Parthenon. Ionic sculptured

ornaments begin to appear upon the entablature. The inward inclination

of the axes of the columns and the curvature of the horizontals have

been neglected in Bassæ, as if the architect had not considered it worth

while to display such refinements to the uncultivated Arcadians. In the

interior of the temple Ionic columns are engaged upon short transverse

walls, which project from the sides. These are so remarkably archaic in

form (_Fig._ 165) that it is difficult to explain how Athenian

architects, who must have been familiar with the interior columns of the

Propylæa and those of the Erechtheion, then in course of construction,

could have prepared the designs. An extremely ancient and undeveloped

Corinthian capital (_Fig._ 176) has been found among the ruins of Bassæ;

it will be referred to below. Many of the anomalies of the temple would

be explained by the assumption that the building occupied the site of a

former chapel, the entrance to which had naturally been upon the east,

and that the lack of available ground prevented the retention of the

original and usual orientation, making the peripteros, as the

enlargement of a former fane, open the inner chamber of the naos upon

one of the long sides.

[Illustration: Fig. 160.--Plan of the Temenos of Eleusis.]

Other Attic remains, some of which date from the end of the fifth

century, also show traces of the deterioration of the art. Chief among

these are the Propylæa of Eleusis and the house of assemblage for those

initiated in the Eleusinian mysteries, known as the Telesterion, a

square hypostyle hall, fronted by a portico of twelve columns,

apparently without a gable. (_Fig._ 160.) It is not known how soon after

the Persian wars the temples of Rhamnous and Sunion were rebuilt; they

may have slightly preceded the age of decline. The increasing love of

magnificence and luxury felt among the Greeks was not satisfied with the

simple majesty of the Doric style; the Ionic was more and more

frequently substituted in preference. The latter had been employed for

the Propylæa of the Athenian acropolis, and had appeared independently

in smaller temples, and, finally, in the national shrine of Attica, the

Erechtheion. The Doric became restricted to porticos and peristyles,

and, in double-storied interiors, to the lower order, for which

important constructional functions it was fitted by the great solidity

of the column. But the desire to simplify the execution of Doric

members, and reduce the expense which must have been attendant upon the

delicate refinements of curvatures, introduced dry and hard geometrical

forms, and the æsthetic value of the style was, for the greater part,

lost. An example of this debasement is offered by the portico of Philip

upon Delos, where the echinos projects in an absolutely straight line.

(_Fig._ 151.) In the colonies, upon the other hand, even as late as the

Roman period, the style was archaistically treated, with a provincial

lack of good taste, illustrated by the weak echinos and apophyge of the

capital of the so-called Temple of Demeter at Pæstum. (_Fig._ 152.)

An entirely different manner of building had early appeared by the side

of the Doric style, which cannot be accounted of quite equal birth with

that eldest male offspring of Hellenic civilization, but, to carry out

the simile, should rather be considered as a step-sister. The

development of the peripteral plan, the echinos coronation of the

channelled shafts, and the entablature of triglyphs, metopes, and

mutules, appear autochthonic and purely Greek; while the Ionic style,

though adopting the plan and general disposition of the former, was, in

its most characteristic details, an importation from Asia. It is not

meant by this that the perfected style was not characteristically

Hellenic. The Greeks accepted none of the products of their neighbors

without a change--a transformation of disposition and detail by their

peculiar genius. But the fundamental motives, the elements of the style,

in as far as these are not identified with the Doric, had been taken

from neighboring Eastern lands of primitive civilization: from the

coasts of Asia Minor and Syria.

The Ionic column betrays this relationship in both base and capital. The

former consists fundamentally of a tore elevated upon a drum, usually

hollowed by a scotia. This tore was employed as a footing for the

columns of Nineveh, and is familiar through one example and through

representations upon reliefs. From thence it was transplanted to Persia,

where, in the middle of the sixth century B.C., it appears with the

horizontal channelling found upon the more primitive Ionic monuments.

(_Fig._ 79.) The concave profile of the under plinth is new and

Hellenic. The delicate perception of the Greek designer recognized the

advantage of this scotia over the clumsy heaviness which had resulted

from the tore being placed immediately upon the ground or upon a

rectangular slab, and the lower member was made to harmonize with the

channelled moulding above it by the emphasis of horizontal lines. It is

uncertain whether the slender proportions of the Ionic shaft, so marked

in comparison with the strength of the Doric style, is to be attributed

to Oriental influences. It agreed as well with the light Ionic

entablature and ceiling as did the powerful Doric column with the great

weight imposed upon it; and it may be regarded as one of the principles

of architectural construction that the strength of the support has ever

been originally determined by the weight of the ceiling and

superstructure: the column has been adapted to the entablature, not the

height of epistyle, frieze and cornice to the diameter of the shaft.

With this consideration agreed the desire to attain great elegance and

lightness of proportion, peculiar to the Ionic race. The Ionic column,

thus made of greater proportional height, had diminution and entasis

like the Doric. It differed remarkably in the fluting. A vertical

grooving cannot be traced upon the columns of Assyria; upon those of

Persia it is similar to the Doric channels, with sharp arrises. The

development of the flute itself may perhaps be deemed peculiarly Greek.

As painted ornaments were gradually given up, they were replaced by

architectural carvings; such sculptured decorations were harmoniously

introduced upon the shaft, and the channels were deepened to a

semicircular profile. This rendered a change of the arrises necessary,

for if the ends of the arcs were to have abutted, as upon the Doric

column, the deep flute, with its extremely sharp edge, could only have

been executed upon a plane. Upon a convexly curved surface, like that of

the cylindrical drums, it would have been impossible to cut semicircular

grooves immediately adjoining, as their outlines would have intersected.

The sharp arrises were therefore relinquished, and a broad vertical

band, the surface of the original cylinder, was left in its place, the

play of light and shade which enlivened the body of the shaft being

increased by these flutings, but the evidence of the derivation of the

channelled column from the polygonal pier was entirely sacrificed, the

cylindrical form being characterized as original by the remaining

fillets. The carving of the shaft was rendered more difficult from the

slight projections left at the top and bottom as transitional members to

the base and to the capital. This horizontal fillet was a further gain

to the outline of the column, concave and convex surfaces thus

alternating from floor to ceiling. The flutings were terminated above

and below, before reaching this transverse member, by a semicircle,

which agreed with their sectional outline.

[Illustration: Fig. 161.--Ionic Order from the Peripteros of the

Mausoleum of Halicarnassos.]

[Illustration: Fig. 162.--Plan of the Normal Ionic Capital.]

[Illustration: Fig. 163.--Plan of the Corner Ionic Capital.]

History of Ancient Art · 第 18 / 39 段