DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4263#0064
xed here by
!>i this
wean;
ornattie.
betimes llSed f(
-US. That
buUdingtllaili5
'he has made ft,,
Presented only t„,
the tripods ^
e of *is buildi„s
ie tells us, that the
curious. <Jnm
ie other under him,
211, and two others
i another to a tree,
s, and two figures
letas, who sacrifice
: they are going to
lion's skin. From
ratinues Mons. Le
ants of the tribe of
:o Hercules, sore-
'hey have most of
iem are perhaps so
i columns is about
g of this edifice is
some architects to
3y, 'having seen a
:ns; but having in
i opinion. I "ave
:s flambeaux allumM
ase. Je soupconne f
Hercule: caronvoit«
a bucher auquel on**
frise portent chacune
r inscription etles to'
avoir presumerquuW
ntsdelatribuAc*;;
;iques, et qu
il fut c
Mons. Le Roy, ^
ureschacune,doDtl'*
La plus «S»«f
r-s Voyage, tome V> f
;plusdedixdi^"ei
OF THE CIIORAGIC MONUMENT OF LYSICRATES. 63
satisfied myself, so as to leave no doubt, that the crowning and all the entablature of the building, on
the architrave of which is an inscription from whence we learn that it was built in the time of Demos-
thenes, are exactly of one self same piece cut out of the block.'a Here Mons. Le Roy, is again mis-
taken ; and if he has really examined this monument at his leisure, he has nevertheless in these parti-
culars, as in many others, copied the erroneous account given of them by Spon; who tells us, that
the covering of this building is one and the same piece with the friezeb. When, as we have before
observed, the architrave and frieze are one piece, the cornice is in three pieces, the roof is one piece,
and another piece composes the upper part of the flower; so that there are in all six pieces in the en-
tablature and crowning of this building.
In his plan of the roof of this building, he has omitted the cavities in the upper surface of the
flower; and he has covered the roof itself with scales instead of pointed leaves. He has likewise de-
corated the top of the three helices or scrolls with acanthus leaves, when in the original there are no
leaves there, nor any ornament, except plain mouldings. He has omitted the two circles of Vitruvian
scroll, &c.
By his elevation (Plate XXV.), it appears that he has not examined below the present surface
of the ground. The range of stones which in this print of his are next the ground, is represented as
one stone only, when in the original it is composed of two; of the second range he has made three
stones, when that like the former is composed of two only in the original. He has not hollowed the
under part of the corona of this basement; and he has finished it with a square fillet, when in the ori-
ginal it finishes with an ovolo.
The tripods which are wrought in basso-relievo on the pannels of the intercolumniation, he has
represented with two legs only ; and he has omitted their handles. The mouldings on which these
tripods are placed, he has profiled at their extremities; and he has omitted the fascia under those
mouldings. His representation of the capitals of the column does not agree with his description;
and neither one nor the other agrees with the original, &c.
In the section (Plate XXVI.), he sets down measures to each different range of the foliage
which composes the flower. Here not only the measures are false, but he has miscounted the number
of these ranges, and has misrepresented their form, both in this and in the preceding plate. The
inside of the roof which he makes quite smooth, the pannels which he has made of an equal thick-
ness from top to bottom, the internal face of the capitals which he has omitted, the two apertures
which he makes in the circular colonnade, and a number of such like inaccuracies, would tire the
reader were they all to be enumerated: they are however so many proofs of Mons. Le Roy's want of
attention. This chapter shall finish with a conjecture proposed by him, and with the observation on
which he founds it.
" Vitruvius", says he, " teaches that the top of round temples should be terminated by a
flower, which is not a very bold ornament. The height of this flowrer which he [Vitruvius] makes
equal to the height of the capital, has given birth to a conjecture of mine. The little round Temple
of Hercules [for so Mons. Le Roy calls this building] is terminated by a kind of capital with three
angles, the height of which does not differ much from that of the capitals of the columns of this edi-
fice. This observation has made me think that the ancients terminated perhaps originally their little
» Le couronnement de cet edifice est ce qu'il y a de plus extra-
ordinaire ; sa forme et sa richesse ont fait douter a quelques ar-
chitects; avec beaucoup de raison, de son antiquite; j'en portai
lc meme jugement, ayantvu a Rome un dessein dece monument
que milord Charlemont avoit fait prendre a Athenes; mais ayant
examine et considere, dans cette derniere ville, ce monument a
loisir, j'ai chang^ d'opinion. J'ai reconnu, a n'en pas douter,
que le couronnement et tout 1'entablcment de l'edince, sur l'archi-
trave duquel on lit une inscription que nous apprend qu'il fut
construit dans le terns de Demosthene, sont exactement d'une.
meme piece, tailles dans le Bloc. Le Roy, Part II. p. 22.
b Ce couvert qui est taille en ecailles, n'Gst qu'une meme piece
avec la frise. Spon's Voyage, tome II. p. 173.
!>i this
wean;
ornattie.
betimes llSed f(
-US. That
buUdingtllaili5
'he has made ft,,
Presented only t„,
the tripods ^
e of *is buildi„s
ie tells us, that the
curious. <Jnm
ie other under him,
211, and two others
i another to a tree,
s, and two figures
letas, who sacrifice
: they are going to
lion's skin. From
ratinues Mons. Le
ants of the tribe of
:o Hercules, sore-
'hey have most of
iem are perhaps so
i columns is about
g of this edifice is
some architects to
3y, 'having seen a
:ns; but having in
i opinion. I "ave
:s flambeaux allumM
ase. Je soupconne f
Hercule: caronvoit«
a bucher auquel on**
frise portent chacune
r inscription etles to'
avoir presumerquuW
ntsdelatribuAc*;;
;iques, et qu
il fut c
Mons. Le Roy, ^
ureschacune,doDtl'*
La plus «S»«f
r-s Voyage, tome V> f
;plusdedixdi^"ei
OF THE CIIORAGIC MONUMENT OF LYSICRATES. 63
satisfied myself, so as to leave no doubt, that the crowning and all the entablature of the building, on
the architrave of which is an inscription from whence we learn that it was built in the time of Demos-
thenes, are exactly of one self same piece cut out of the block.'a Here Mons. Le Roy, is again mis-
taken ; and if he has really examined this monument at his leisure, he has nevertheless in these parti-
culars, as in many others, copied the erroneous account given of them by Spon; who tells us, that
the covering of this building is one and the same piece with the friezeb. When, as we have before
observed, the architrave and frieze are one piece, the cornice is in three pieces, the roof is one piece,
and another piece composes the upper part of the flower; so that there are in all six pieces in the en-
tablature and crowning of this building.
In his plan of the roof of this building, he has omitted the cavities in the upper surface of the
flower; and he has covered the roof itself with scales instead of pointed leaves. He has likewise de-
corated the top of the three helices or scrolls with acanthus leaves, when in the original there are no
leaves there, nor any ornament, except plain mouldings. He has omitted the two circles of Vitruvian
scroll, &c.
By his elevation (Plate XXV.), it appears that he has not examined below the present surface
of the ground. The range of stones which in this print of his are next the ground, is represented as
one stone only, when in the original it is composed of two; of the second range he has made three
stones, when that like the former is composed of two only in the original. He has not hollowed the
under part of the corona of this basement; and he has finished it with a square fillet, when in the ori-
ginal it finishes with an ovolo.
The tripods which are wrought in basso-relievo on the pannels of the intercolumniation, he has
represented with two legs only ; and he has omitted their handles. The mouldings on which these
tripods are placed, he has profiled at their extremities; and he has omitted the fascia under those
mouldings. His representation of the capitals of the column does not agree with his description;
and neither one nor the other agrees with the original, &c.
In the section (Plate XXVI.), he sets down measures to each different range of the foliage
which composes the flower. Here not only the measures are false, but he has miscounted the number
of these ranges, and has misrepresented their form, both in this and in the preceding plate. The
inside of the roof which he makes quite smooth, the pannels which he has made of an equal thick-
ness from top to bottom, the internal face of the capitals which he has omitted, the two apertures
which he makes in the circular colonnade, and a number of such like inaccuracies, would tire the
reader were they all to be enumerated: they are however so many proofs of Mons. Le Roy's want of
attention. This chapter shall finish with a conjecture proposed by him, and with the observation on
which he founds it.
" Vitruvius", says he, " teaches that the top of round temples should be terminated by a
flower, which is not a very bold ornament. The height of this flowrer which he [Vitruvius] makes
equal to the height of the capital, has given birth to a conjecture of mine. The little round Temple
of Hercules [for so Mons. Le Roy calls this building] is terminated by a kind of capital with three
angles, the height of which does not differ much from that of the capitals of the columns of this edi-
fice. This observation has made me think that the ancients terminated perhaps originally their little
» Le couronnement de cet edifice est ce qu'il y a de plus extra-
ordinaire ; sa forme et sa richesse ont fait douter a quelques ar-
chitects; avec beaucoup de raison, de son antiquite; j'en portai
lc meme jugement, ayantvu a Rome un dessein dece monument
que milord Charlemont avoit fait prendre a Athenes; mais ayant
examine et considere, dans cette derniere ville, ce monument a
loisir, j'ai chang^ d'opinion. J'ai reconnu, a n'en pas douter,
que le couronnement et tout 1'entablcment de l'edince, sur l'archi-
trave duquel on lit une inscription que nous apprend qu'il fut
construit dans le terns de Demosthene, sont exactement d'une.
meme piece, tailles dans le Bloc. Le Roy, Part II. p. 22.
b Ce couvert qui est taille en ecailles, n'Gst qu'une meme piece
avec la frise. Spon's Voyage, tome II. p. 173.