DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4327#0028
20 INTRODUCTION.
CORINTHIAN ORDER.
It is hardly necessary, in a brief introductory essay like the present, to say much regarding the origin of the
Corinthian order. It was hardly, if ever, used by the Greeks as a temple order, though no doubt invented by
them. In such little gems as the so-called Tower of the Winds, and the Choragic monument of Lysicrates, it
was used with a grace that was never surpassed, but in these instances it is more on the scale adopted by a carver
in wood or marble for ornamental purposes, than of architecture properly so-called. There was also at least one
Corinthian capital in the Temple of Apollo at Didyme,1 which is unsurpassed for elegance by any afterwards
employed, and another at Bassa3,2 which may have been beautiful also, but is too much ruined for its design to be
well made out. It is also nearly certain that a range of Corinthian pillars (probably ten or eleven) adorned the
cella of the Temple of Minerva at Tegea, and with that small list we have exhausted nearly all we know of the
employment of this order by the Greeks of the great age. It was afterwards, it is true, adopted by the Romans,
and used, even on Greek soil, with a magnificence and richness before which the simpler Doric and more elegant
Ionic must " pale their ineffectual fires," though, in spite of all its splendour, it never equalled them in all the
higher qualities of architectural design.
The base and shaft of the order were borrowed, with very slight modifications, from those of the Ionic order
previously in use, and so was the entablature in all essential parts, only very considerably enriched. It
retained too, to the last, a reminiscence of its origin in the small angular volutes which support the angles of
the abacus. It cannot, however, be said to have derived any feature from the pre-existing Doric, and remained
throughout antagonistic to the principles on which that order was designed. The great essential feature which
constituted the new order was the introduction of a tall bell-shaped capital, adorned with acanthus leaves. If
we may apply to this feature the same logic that was used above, when trying to investigate the origin of the
Doric shaft, Ave can hardly fail to admit that the idea of this capital was borrowed from Egypt. It is at all
events certain that the Egyptians used tall bell-shaped capitals adorned with leaves of plants and other
vegetable forms, at least as early as the eighteenth dynasty, and therefore certainly before the twelfth century,
B.C. It is true they only used the native papyrus, the lotus, and the palm branch, for the decoration of their
capitals; this, however, was quite sufficient to suggest to an ingenious Greek how other vegetable forms might
be applied to the same purpose, and once the acanthus was suggested it was found so pre-eminently appropriate
for the purpose, that no other was employed down to the fall of the Roman Empire.
We have no certain knowledge of the time when the acanthus was first applied to the bell-shaped
capital, nor who was the architect who first introduced it. It may have been Callimachus, though
the silly story that Yitruvius adds to his account of the invention by him does much to discredit his title.3
It certainly, however, was in his age, though more probably Scopas was the real inventor, from what we know of
his career. Callimachus was more of a sculptor than an architect, and it must have required an architect of the
most consummate genius and taste to apply so novel a form in such a manner that it was at once accepted by
his countrymen, and its use persevered in with very little variation during the ensuing six or seven centuries.
What makes this more remarkable is, that it was frequently adopted by peoples who had very little sympathy
with the feelings of the Greeks and still less appreciation of the exquisite refinements of Grecian taste.
JAS. FERGUSSON.
1 Ant. of Ionia, vol. i. cl). iii. pi. 8. 3 Ant. of Athens, supplementary vol. pi. xv.
3 Yitruvius, vol. iv. cli. i.
CORINTHIAN ORDER.
It is hardly necessary, in a brief introductory essay like the present, to say much regarding the origin of the
Corinthian order. It was hardly, if ever, used by the Greeks as a temple order, though no doubt invented by
them. In such little gems as the so-called Tower of the Winds, and the Choragic monument of Lysicrates, it
was used with a grace that was never surpassed, but in these instances it is more on the scale adopted by a carver
in wood or marble for ornamental purposes, than of architecture properly so-called. There was also at least one
Corinthian capital in the Temple of Apollo at Didyme,1 which is unsurpassed for elegance by any afterwards
employed, and another at Bassa3,2 which may have been beautiful also, but is too much ruined for its design to be
well made out. It is also nearly certain that a range of Corinthian pillars (probably ten or eleven) adorned the
cella of the Temple of Minerva at Tegea, and with that small list we have exhausted nearly all we know of the
employment of this order by the Greeks of the great age. It was afterwards, it is true, adopted by the Romans,
and used, even on Greek soil, with a magnificence and richness before which the simpler Doric and more elegant
Ionic must " pale their ineffectual fires," though, in spite of all its splendour, it never equalled them in all the
higher qualities of architectural design.
The base and shaft of the order were borrowed, with very slight modifications, from those of the Ionic order
previously in use, and so was the entablature in all essential parts, only very considerably enriched. It
retained too, to the last, a reminiscence of its origin in the small angular volutes which support the angles of
the abacus. It cannot, however, be said to have derived any feature from the pre-existing Doric, and remained
throughout antagonistic to the principles on which that order was designed. The great essential feature which
constituted the new order was the introduction of a tall bell-shaped capital, adorned with acanthus leaves. If
we may apply to this feature the same logic that was used above, when trying to investigate the origin of the
Doric shaft, Ave can hardly fail to admit that the idea of this capital was borrowed from Egypt. It is at all
events certain that the Egyptians used tall bell-shaped capitals adorned with leaves of plants and other
vegetable forms, at least as early as the eighteenth dynasty, and therefore certainly before the twelfth century,
B.C. It is true they only used the native papyrus, the lotus, and the palm branch, for the decoration of their
capitals; this, however, was quite sufficient to suggest to an ingenious Greek how other vegetable forms might
be applied to the same purpose, and once the acanthus was suggested it was found so pre-eminently appropriate
for the purpose, that no other was employed down to the fall of the Roman Empire.
We have no certain knowledge of the time when the acanthus was first applied to the bell-shaped
capital, nor who was the architect who first introduced it. It may have been Callimachus, though
the silly story that Yitruvius adds to his account of the invention by him does much to discredit his title.3
It certainly, however, was in his age, though more probably Scopas was the real inventor, from what we know of
his career. Callimachus was more of a sculptor than an architect, and it must have required an architect of the
most consummate genius and taste to apply so novel a form in such a manner that it was at once accepted by
his countrymen, and its use persevered in with very little variation during the ensuing six or seven centuries.
What makes this more remarkable is, that it was frequently adopted by peoples who had very little sympathy
with the feelings of the Greeks and still less appreciation of the exquisite refinements of Grecian taste.
JAS. FERGUSSON.
1 Ant. of Ionia, vol. i. cl). iii. pi. 8. 3 Ant. of Athens, supplementary vol. pi. xv.
3 Yitruvius, vol. iv. cli. i.