DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.47233#0107
CHAP. IV.]
THE THEATRE.
91
§ 7. Concluding Remarks.
Concluding
Remarks.
The Theatre at Megalopolis is undoubtedly one of the most interesting Greek Theatres
hitherto excavated. The auditorium as a whole is, indeed, far less perfectly preserved than
the corresponding part of the Theatre at the Hieron of Asclepius near Epidaurus, and the
general beauty of the design is less striking. But the seats of honour at Megalopolis are in
better condition than those at Epidaurus, and the stage buildings have undergone less
alteration in later times.
Again the Megalopolitan Theatre has several features which are altogether without parallel
elsewhere. The connexion of the Theatre with a great covered hall (the Thersilion), the portico
of which served as a background for theatrical representations, is an altogether new feature.
And the same is true of the %κανοθηκα, which was the corollary of the Thersilion, since the
latter occupied the place usually assigned to property and dressing rooms.
But for many scholars the chief interest of this Theatre will lie in the evidence which it offers
for or against the existence of a raised stage. In considering this evidence different periods in the
history of the Theatre must be carefully distinguished. (1) Though no actual remains of a raised
stage have been found as part of the original plan at Megalopolis, we have shown that such a stage
is a necessary inference from the difference of level which existed, before the addition of the
lower steps, between the bottom of the Portico stylobate and the orchestra. And (2) the later or
‘ Vitruvian ’ proscenium, though in many respects similar to those which have been found in other
Theatres, has one feature—viz. the absence of any traces of an entrance through it to the
orchestra—which almost excludes the possibility of explaining it otherwise than as a stage.
Perhaps, however, those who on general grounds dispute the existence of a stage in Greek
Theatres may be willing to admit that there was such a stage at Megalopolis, but may argue
that the Megalopolitan Theatre is in several ways abnormal. That it is abnormal we admit, the
Thersilion and its corollary the 'Ζκανοθηκα being peculiar to it. But on the other hand we do not
think any one will contend that the close connexion between the Theatre and the
Thersilion could necessitate a stage at Megalopolis, supposing a stage to be unusual in Greek
Theatres.
Evidence for
stage
(1) in 4th cen-
tury,
(2) in later times
At the same time we do not say that what is true of one Greek Theatre must necessarily
be true of all. In the present chapter we have endeavoured to interpret the remains of Megalopolis
on their own merits, and have, so far as possible, avoided controversial matter. Such contributions
as we wish to make to the general question, without special reference to Megalopolis, have
accordingly been reserved for Appendices A, B, and C.
E. A. Gardner,
William Loring.
[We understand from Mr. Loring that since passing a proof of Chap. IV. he has changed
his opinion as to some of the views contained in it. He writes : 4 The evidence on which I
most relied—that supplied by the tooling of the stone in different parts of the structure—has
proved, on a final examination, to be (in my opinion) less strong than I formerly supposed ;
and without it I do not feel that the evidence for a fourth century stage is conclusive.’ Mr. Ernest
Gardner, on the other hand, maintains the ground taken up in Chap. IV. It being obviously
impossible to recast the chapter while it is passing through the press, we must leave Mr. Loring
to explain his modified views more fully in some other place.—Edd.]
THE THEATRE.
91
§ 7. Concluding Remarks.
Concluding
Remarks.
The Theatre at Megalopolis is undoubtedly one of the most interesting Greek Theatres
hitherto excavated. The auditorium as a whole is, indeed, far less perfectly preserved than
the corresponding part of the Theatre at the Hieron of Asclepius near Epidaurus, and the
general beauty of the design is less striking. But the seats of honour at Megalopolis are in
better condition than those at Epidaurus, and the stage buildings have undergone less
alteration in later times.
Again the Megalopolitan Theatre has several features which are altogether without parallel
elsewhere. The connexion of the Theatre with a great covered hall (the Thersilion), the portico
of which served as a background for theatrical representations, is an altogether new feature.
And the same is true of the %κανοθηκα, which was the corollary of the Thersilion, since the
latter occupied the place usually assigned to property and dressing rooms.
But for many scholars the chief interest of this Theatre will lie in the evidence which it offers
for or against the existence of a raised stage. In considering this evidence different periods in the
history of the Theatre must be carefully distinguished. (1) Though no actual remains of a raised
stage have been found as part of the original plan at Megalopolis, we have shown that such a stage
is a necessary inference from the difference of level which existed, before the addition of the
lower steps, between the bottom of the Portico stylobate and the orchestra. And (2) the later or
‘ Vitruvian ’ proscenium, though in many respects similar to those which have been found in other
Theatres, has one feature—viz. the absence of any traces of an entrance through it to the
orchestra—which almost excludes the possibility of explaining it otherwise than as a stage.
Perhaps, however, those who on general grounds dispute the existence of a stage in Greek
Theatres may be willing to admit that there was such a stage at Megalopolis, but may argue
that the Megalopolitan Theatre is in several ways abnormal. That it is abnormal we admit, the
Thersilion and its corollary the 'Ζκανοθηκα being peculiar to it. But on the other hand we do not
think any one will contend that the close connexion between the Theatre and the
Thersilion could necessitate a stage at Megalopolis, supposing a stage to be unusual in Greek
Theatres.
Evidence for
stage
(1) in 4th cen-
tury,
(2) in later times
At the same time we do not say that what is true of one Greek Theatre must necessarily
be true of all. In the present chapter we have endeavoured to interpret the remains of Megalopolis
on their own merits, and have, so far as possible, avoided controversial matter. Such contributions
as we wish to make to the general question, without special reference to Megalopolis, have
accordingly been reserved for Appendices A, B, and C.
E. A. Gardner,
William Loring.
[We understand from Mr. Loring that since passing a proof of Chap. IV. he has changed
his opinion as to some of the views contained in it. He writes : 4 The evidence on which I
most relied—that supplied by the tooling of the stone in different parts of the structure—has
proved, on a final examination, to be (in my opinion) less strong than I formerly supposed ;
and without it I do not feel that the evidence for a fourth century stage is conclusive.’ Mr. Ernest
Gardner, on the other hand, maintains the ground taken up in Chap. IV. It being obviously
impossible to recast the chapter while it is passing through the press, we must leave Mr. Loring
to explain his modified views more fully in some other place.—Edd.]