DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4326#0108
70 APHRODISIAS.
PLATE XV.
PLAN OF THE LACUNARIA.
The close position of the columns of the front, which necessarily diminishes the width of the
ambulatio, admits of the use of stone or marble Iacunaria in the pseudodipteral temple. Vitruvius
gives an interval of two diameters and a quarter to his Eustyle-octastyle ; such an interval would
have made the width of the ambulatio 20\6VV instead of 1S.T. Marble Iacunaria in pieces of such
extent could not be very extensively employed, especially as it would be necessary to add two feet
for a bearing at each end.
We do not however in this Plate pretend to give the arrangement of the Iacunaria as that ori-
ginally adopted. It is sufficient to observe that the fragments, which time and the lime burners
of Geyra have left, will be found as far as they go, to authorize the restoration.
PLATE XVI.
ELEVATION OF THE TEMPLE.
The temple was octastyle of very unusual severity of character, if that expression may be al-
lowed to us. The columns stand on bases having square plinths, which leave the clear openings,
or width of footway, not quite 3 feet 9 inches, scarely the width of a common door. In alluding
to the invention of the pseudodipteral style, in which Hermogenes, is said to have exercised
great science, Vitruvius explains the merit in the following sentence, " Pteromatos autem ratio et
columnarum circum aedem dispositio ideo est inventa, ut adspectus propter asperitatem interco-
lumniorum haberetauctoritatem." Nothing however in this passage leads to the belief that a new
arrangement of the external range was another and very important measure, to cover or conceal
the removal of so many of the columns, without impairing the general effect. Possibly a line has
been omitted which none of the MSS. supply.
In the previous chapter of the same book Vitruvius cites, it is supposed, the temple of Diana at
Magnesia built by Hermogenes, as an example of the pseudodipteral, having eight columns in the
front. Now this temple, which will form the subject of discussion in a subsequent volume, had
its columns nearly two diameters asunder. We cannot understand how such a temple could
permit, without prejudice, the inner range to be removed, making the ambulatio round the cella
nearly 23 feet in the clear; it could therefore never have been pseudodipteral. But all difficul-
ties will be overcome by supposing, as in the Parthenon, the cella to have been the width of 5 in-
tervals and 4 columns, or about 65 feet; in short that the temple was peripteral, or monopteral,
and not pseudodipteral.
PLATE XV.
PLAN OF THE LACUNARIA.
The close position of the columns of the front, which necessarily diminishes the width of the
ambulatio, admits of the use of stone or marble Iacunaria in the pseudodipteral temple. Vitruvius
gives an interval of two diameters and a quarter to his Eustyle-octastyle ; such an interval would
have made the width of the ambulatio 20\6VV instead of 1S.T. Marble Iacunaria in pieces of such
extent could not be very extensively employed, especially as it would be necessary to add two feet
for a bearing at each end.
We do not however in this Plate pretend to give the arrangement of the Iacunaria as that ori-
ginally adopted. It is sufficient to observe that the fragments, which time and the lime burners
of Geyra have left, will be found as far as they go, to authorize the restoration.
PLATE XVI.
ELEVATION OF THE TEMPLE.
The temple was octastyle of very unusual severity of character, if that expression may be al-
lowed to us. The columns stand on bases having square plinths, which leave the clear openings,
or width of footway, not quite 3 feet 9 inches, scarely the width of a common door. In alluding
to the invention of the pseudodipteral style, in which Hermogenes, is said to have exercised
great science, Vitruvius explains the merit in the following sentence, " Pteromatos autem ratio et
columnarum circum aedem dispositio ideo est inventa, ut adspectus propter asperitatem interco-
lumniorum haberetauctoritatem." Nothing however in this passage leads to the belief that a new
arrangement of the external range was another and very important measure, to cover or conceal
the removal of so many of the columns, without impairing the general effect. Possibly a line has
been omitted which none of the MSS. supply.
In the previous chapter of the same book Vitruvius cites, it is supposed, the temple of Diana at
Magnesia built by Hermogenes, as an example of the pseudodipteral, having eight columns in the
front. Now this temple, which will form the subject of discussion in a subsequent volume, had
its columns nearly two diameters asunder. We cannot understand how such a temple could
permit, without prejudice, the inner range to be removed, making the ambulatio round the cella
nearly 23 feet in the clear; it could therefore never have been pseudodipteral. But all difficul-
ties will be overcome by supposing, as in the Parthenon, the cella to have been the width of 5 in-
tervals and 4 columns, or about 65 feet; in short that the temple was peripteral, or monopteral,
and not pseudodipteral.