DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4945#0022
Earlier Researches. i i
what he believed to be a layer of charcoal, and then putty again. He had
discovered at an early period of his excavation a fine Ionic capital which he
referred to the earlier Temple, and later he recovered other fragments
of early capitals, cornices, cymatium and bases, as well as drums. Finally
he had the good fortune to unearth many fragments of early sculptures
representing figures under life-size, which he supposed to belong partly to the
dpLyKos of his Great Altar, partly (e.g., lions' heads) to the Temple parapet.
The majority of these were found after he had blown up certain concrete piers
which stood in the cella space, and were supposed to be foundations of a
Byzantine church ; but a few were unearthed at the extreme east of the site
near the lowest step of the Hellenistic platform. Certain other fragments of
relief-sculptures on a larger scale were found "at a low level on the site of
the Temple " (no more precise locality is recorded), which proved to be drum-
sculptures of early columnae caclatac. These latter are presumably those
that Wood, in another passage (Discoveries, p. 276), ascribes to an earlier
Temple than any he had actually found ; but whether he thought this had
stood on the same site or not, he did not say. It may be mentioned at once
that in this distinction he was probably wrong. All his early fragments are of
sufficiently identical style to have belonged to one and the same Temple, if
the building of it was spread over a number of years, as is stated by Pliny.
This is practically all that Wood published about his discoveries in the early
stratum, after the termination of his excavations in 1874. His record did not go
into detail concerning either the architectural or the plastic remains, and it
showed serious sins of omission, some of which are very hard to account for, if
he watched his excavations while in progress. One error of observation must
be particularly noticed now, since its correction did not depend altogether -on
later excavations.
Predisposed, no doubt, by the assumption * that a Temple, with which the
name of Paeonius was to be connected, was begun about 400 B.C. and only
just completed when Herostratus conceived his disastrous ambition to become
famous by a crime, Wood thought he found a distinct stratum of remains,
whose top was at a level nearly 4 feet above the lowest pavement and about
3 feet below the Hellenistic stylobate. Large patches of a highly-polished
white marble pavement, he says, "remained in position " at that level, and were
only discovered on the removal of the upper portion of the foundation piers
of the church (p. 263). With this pavement he connected two marble blocks
resting on a mass of foundations at the west end of the cella, and showing a
1 Hasu.l on Enaebius, Chron. i. 134 : see above, p. 5.
C 2
what he believed to be a layer of charcoal, and then putty again. He had
discovered at an early period of his excavation a fine Ionic capital which he
referred to the earlier Temple, and later he recovered other fragments
of early capitals, cornices, cymatium and bases, as well as drums. Finally
he had the good fortune to unearth many fragments of early sculptures
representing figures under life-size, which he supposed to belong partly to the
dpLyKos of his Great Altar, partly (e.g., lions' heads) to the Temple parapet.
The majority of these were found after he had blown up certain concrete piers
which stood in the cella space, and were supposed to be foundations of a
Byzantine church ; but a few were unearthed at the extreme east of the site
near the lowest step of the Hellenistic platform. Certain other fragments of
relief-sculptures on a larger scale were found "at a low level on the site of
the Temple " (no more precise locality is recorded), which proved to be drum-
sculptures of early columnae caclatac. These latter are presumably those
that Wood, in another passage (Discoveries, p. 276), ascribes to an earlier
Temple than any he had actually found ; but whether he thought this had
stood on the same site or not, he did not say. It may be mentioned at once
that in this distinction he was probably wrong. All his early fragments are of
sufficiently identical style to have belonged to one and the same Temple, if
the building of it was spread over a number of years, as is stated by Pliny.
This is practically all that Wood published about his discoveries in the early
stratum, after the termination of his excavations in 1874. His record did not go
into detail concerning either the architectural or the plastic remains, and it
showed serious sins of omission, some of which are very hard to account for, if
he watched his excavations while in progress. One error of observation must
be particularly noticed now, since its correction did not depend altogether -on
later excavations.
Predisposed, no doubt, by the assumption * that a Temple, with which the
name of Paeonius was to be connected, was begun about 400 B.C. and only
just completed when Herostratus conceived his disastrous ambition to become
famous by a crime, Wood thought he found a distinct stratum of remains,
whose top was at a level nearly 4 feet above the lowest pavement and about
3 feet below the Hellenistic stylobate. Large patches of a highly-polished
white marble pavement, he says, "remained in position " at that level, and were
only discovered on the removal of the upper portion of the foundation piers
of the church (p. 263). With this pavement he connected two marble blocks
resting on a mass of foundations at the west end of the cella, and showing a
1 Hasu.l on Enaebius, Chron. i. 134 : see above, p. 5.
C 2