DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.45927#0080
78
6. MATERIALS AND TECHNIQUES
6.5 Revetment
The curved marble orthostats of the podium at the base of the upper cavea, and the retaining wall at its top,
acted as revetment in that they masked coarse surfaces of mortared rubble and roughly cut bluish gray marble.
But as they measured between 0.20 and 0.25 m thick and were secured by a system of clamps and dowels they
must be regarded primarily as structural in nature.
The stage building and the pedestals of the scaenae frons were revetted with thin sheets of marble which
were fixed to the supporting masonry by means of iron pins.258 As described above, the marble walls of the
original phase must have been exposed as they were finely dressed, and bore at least one inscription. They were
covered subsequently in the course of the renovations under Vedius. The white marble panels inscribed with
the Imperial letters, preserved in the British Museum,259 have been reconstituted from numerous fragments and
given a slate backing. The few accessible edges bear saw marks which seem to be modern; they were probably
cut by J. T. Wood from larger panels of unknown size and trimmed to facilitate transportation and display, and
thus offer no technical information about methods of attachment. They are between 6 cm and 8 cm thick.
A number of holes in the scene wall measuring 2 * 2 cm held anchor pins of which four are preserved (plan
4). Arranged in two pairs, these secured the pilaster bases behind the first and second columns. The holes of
each pair are spaced 0.34 m apart and are 0.32 m above the stylobate, the same height as the one preserved
column base. Projecting from the iron plugs are flat nails which extended out before being bent down and
inserted into holes in the tops of the pilaster bases. The same method was used to attach the base moldings
of the pedestals to the masonry behind them. But the marble sheets masking the pedestal shafts, which had a
maximum thickness of only 2 cm, were held in place by straight pins whose holes can be seen in the tops of
the base moldings and in the under surfaces of the stylobate blocks.
The numerous anchor holes visible in the piers probably belong to the first phase, remaining in use through
the second phase, when the walls around the three original doorways were revetted with the rest of the facade.
When the second and fifth doorways were cut through, iron pins in their sides secured either thin doorjambs
or marble sheeting. Aside from the cuttings for the pilaster bases and pedestal base moldings, the numerous
anchor holes visible in the preserved wall surfaces are without an obvious pattern, but must reflect the arrange-
ment of revetment slabs of various sizes. Some piers also show anchor holes in their exterior corners, and the
pier against which Pedestal 1 was built has a pair of holes for horizontal pins in its upper surface.
6.6 Petit appareil
This well-known method of Roman construction, found throughout Ephesos,260 was used only in the walls built
up between the piers of the parodoi in the Antonine phase (plan 5), to support vaults which carried extensions
of the seating to the stage wall. These walls were capped at the level of the tall bases above the pillars with
leveling courses made of re-used orthostats, above which the walls continued to the springing of a rising vault.
Short segments of petit appareil were built on the same vertical plane on the two corner pillars hiding the tall
pedestals and bases which had supported the corner pilasters in the first phase. The walls were made of mor-
tared rubble faced with stones worked flat on their outer surfaces and set in regular courses which varied from
0.16 to 0.24 m in height. The vertical joints are generally narrow with adjacent stones sometimes touching,
while the horizontal mortar beds are thick and normally contain smaller stones and bits of terracotta.
6.7 Brickwork
Brickwork appears in the Bouleuterion only in the rear corridor where it was used in walls that were built up
against the rough south face of the scene (pls. 40, 1; 43,2).261 The existing buttresses were encased in a masonry
258 This is also the case for the marble revetment of the Nymphaeum Traiani, cf. Quatember, FiE (forthcoming). Marble slabs in the
domestic context of the “Hanghauser” are also often secured by bronze pins. See Koller 2004, 111-124.
259 See below chap. 8.2.2-8.2.6.
260 For example the back wall of the Nymphaeum Traiani and the “Kaisersaal” of the Vedius Gymnasium and the East Gymnasium;
see Quatember 2009, 463-465.
261 For a summary on the usage of brick in Greece and Asia Minor see Dodge 1987, 106-116. On brick formats in Ephesos see Thur
6. MATERIALS AND TECHNIQUES
6.5 Revetment
The curved marble orthostats of the podium at the base of the upper cavea, and the retaining wall at its top,
acted as revetment in that they masked coarse surfaces of mortared rubble and roughly cut bluish gray marble.
But as they measured between 0.20 and 0.25 m thick and were secured by a system of clamps and dowels they
must be regarded primarily as structural in nature.
The stage building and the pedestals of the scaenae frons were revetted with thin sheets of marble which
were fixed to the supporting masonry by means of iron pins.258 As described above, the marble walls of the
original phase must have been exposed as they were finely dressed, and bore at least one inscription. They were
covered subsequently in the course of the renovations under Vedius. The white marble panels inscribed with
the Imperial letters, preserved in the British Museum,259 have been reconstituted from numerous fragments and
given a slate backing. The few accessible edges bear saw marks which seem to be modern; they were probably
cut by J. T. Wood from larger panels of unknown size and trimmed to facilitate transportation and display, and
thus offer no technical information about methods of attachment. They are between 6 cm and 8 cm thick.
A number of holes in the scene wall measuring 2 * 2 cm held anchor pins of which four are preserved (plan
4). Arranged in two pairs, these secured the pilaster bases behind the first and second columns. The holes of
each pair are spaced 0.34 m apart and are 0.32 m above the stylobate, the same height as the one preserved
column base. Projecting from the iron plugs are flat nails which extended out before being bent down and
inserted into holes in the tops of the pilaster bases. The same method was used to attach the base moldings
of the pedestals to the masonry behind them. But the marble sheets masking the pedestal shafts, which had a
maximum thickness of only 2 cm, were held in place by straight pins whose holes can be seen in the tops of
the base moldings and in the under surfaces of the stylobate blocks.
The numerous anchor holes visible in the piers probably belong to the first phase, remaining in use through
the second phase, when the walls around the three original doorways were revetted with the rest of the facade.
When the second and fifth doorways were cut through, iron pins in their sides secured either thin doorjambs
or marble sheeting. Aside from the cuttings for the pilaster bases and pedestal base moldings, the numerous
anchor holes visible in the preserved wall surfaces are without an obvious pattern, but must reflect the arrange-
ment of revetment slabs of various sizes. Some piers also show anchor holes in their exterior corners, and the
pier against which Pedestal 1 was built has a pair of holes for horizontal pins in its upper surface.
6.6 Petit appareil
This well-known method of Roman construction, found throughout Ephesos,260 was used only in the walls built
up between the piers of the parodoi in the Antonine phase (plan 5), to support vaults which carried extensions
of the seating to the stage wall. These walls were capped at the level of the tall bases above the pillars with
leveling courses made of re-used orthostats, above which the walls continued to the springing of a rising vault.
Short segments of petit appareil were built on the same vertical plane on the two corner pillars hiding the tall
pedestals and bases which had supported the corner pilasters in the first phase. The walls were made of mor-
tared rubble faced with stones worked flat on their outer surfaces and set in regular courses which varied from
0.16 to 0.24 m in height. The vertical joints are generally narrow with adjacent stones sometimes touching,
while the horizontal mortar beds are thick and normally contain smaller stones and bits of terracotta.
6.7 Brickwork
Brickwork appears in the Bouleuterion only in the rear corridor where it was used in walls that were built up
against the rough south face of the scene (pls. 40, 1; 43,2).261 The existing buttresses were encased in a masonry
258 This is also the case for the marble revetment of the Nymphaeum Traiani, cf. Quatember, FiE (forthcoming). Marble slabs in the
domestic context of the “Hanghauser” are also often secured by bronze pins. See Koller 2004, 111-124.
259 See below chap. 8.2.2-8.2.6.
260 For example the back wall of the Nymphaeum Traiani and the “Kaisersaal” of the Vedius Gymnasium and the East Gymnasium;
see Quatember 2009, 463-465.
261 For a summary on the usage of brick in Greece and Asia Minor see Dodge 1987, 106-116. On brick formats in Ephesos see Thur
