Stuart, James; Revett, Nicholas: The antiquities of Athens (Band 2) (London, 1825)

r°rktothes

operatio^
asurea^toset

atlgueand^;

°feartha*drubH'
parts of the theat,
1» at lea;

■e ranges of3eats

■st, the rudbe.

Old

hn

icircular declivi
igs which were s
J front of the j
e now see,i
glit there was a proU
ie unpublished inscriF.
:overies we wished to;
s we were to

e time in taking
interruption;
and communicationsc
1 had escaped the nt:
in the fourb

i part of the Sinn &■
n the territory of if
ilandCalaurea.il!*1
w Hassane, main*
the right hand, i*
,io% but anciently*

.a« had been en?
two others, to be

msversesecnon, p j

tu-t. These Jj^

.fthatvoumej §i
ves I could maU " Fir

thatadra^of i,|
;on,t Data ^tr'1'

;btedtothellbeta;M#

r. Stuart

t ins
; sketches"

enabled me, :;-ft^

I^iof r

rop

ihonw

he red m
Lexoi)ian

mullets a

^

OF THE THEATRE OF BACCHUS. y9

saeum, from the poet Musams, who, Pausanias informs us, was buried there; and that on the place
where his sepulchre had been built, the monument of a Syrian (evidently Philopappus) was afterwards
erected \ The front of the scene occupies the principal part of this view; the area, in which were
the seats of the spectators, neglected for ages, has at length acquired a surface of vegetable earth, and
is now annually sown with barley, which, as the general custom here is, the Disdar-Aga's horses eat
green; little or no grass being produced in the neighbourhood of Athens. The fore-ground is a re-
cess or little grotto in the upper part of the theatre, whence this view was taken; it is marked at A.
in the following plate ; here Sir G. Wheler imagines, not improbably, a tripod was placed, on which
was wrought the story of Apollo and Diana slaying the sons and daughters ofb Niobec. In this place
I have endeavoured to represent my companion, Mr. Revett, who from hence, did with great patience
and accuracy, mark all the masonry in the front of the scene d.

PLATE XXXVI.

The Plan. On this we must observe, that the exterior wall is the portion of a circle, the
centre of which being found, it will follow, from the precepts of Vitruvius, if we suppose what he
has said concerning the Greek theatres applicable to this building, that the extent of the proscenium,
with the situation and dimension of the orchestra, may be determined. For the distance a. b. from
the centre a. of the exterior circle, to the front of the scene D. b. B. will be the radius of a lesser
concentric circle, in which three squares being inscribed, after the manner he has directed, the side of
the square g. f. nearest to the scene and parallel to it, will then mark the limit of the proscenium, and
the remaining part of the circle, if we do not mistake Vitruvius, will form the space assigned by him
to the orchestra; within which space, I am persuaded, the pulpitum or logeum projected at least as
far as to the centre a. for I cannot imagine that the actors were confined to the narrow space assigned
by this scheme to the proscenium, or, in other words, that the pulpitum and proscenium were, as
Galiani has imagined, only different names for the same place0. Pollux, whose evidence will have
great weight in this disquisition, enumerating the parts of a theatre, specifies the orchestra, the
logeum, the proscenium, the parascenia, &c. as different and distinct places f; besides, if they were
not, and the logeum was only a part of the proscenium, it would follow, that many of the spectators
would be in a situation where they could see but very little of the actors, and others would not see
them at all, during the whole representation; a defect which it is not easy to conceive could exist in
a building where great art and expense were employed, principally with intention to accommodate
the audience in such manner that they might all see and hear, to the best advantage, whatever was
produced on the stage.

' Fig. 1. is the general plan. Fig. 2. The two sides of the proscenium to a larger scale.'

I am aware of the difficulty of explaining the parts of a theatre appropriated to the actors;
and it is with great diffidence I produce the ideas suggested to me by the view of this ruin.

D. b. B. The front of the scenee.

e II pulpito, ossia proscenlo Greco. Vitruv. Galiani, L. V.
C- VI. not. 8. p. 189.

' The pulpitum, or, in other words, the Greek proscenium.'

f MeVoj SztLrcov, y.ai irvXiS, y.ai t]/«A(?, v.cCi yara-ro/xvi, zBPKiSes,
tj'Wi, oVv>jcrrp«, Xoys'iov, nrpoaxyviov, nrapcio-y.vvia., vTroay.yvict, x.T. ^.

» Paus. L. I. C. XXV. p. 61.

b 'E» S\ t? y-ogvtp? rov Sscctpou, VKrihouiv l<rr>» It rat; nrnpccn; inn TO»
'AxgovoXu' T?»Vou« S\ eVeo-ti y-ctt top-to- 'Anri\?w* S\ h airi? Y.m Ag-
TEf/.K rok nta.Xli.% do-it ximpovvts; tou; Nioffuj. PaUS. L. I. C. XXI.

p. 49.

' But at the summit of the theatre there is a cavern in the J. Poll. L. IV. C. XIX. sect. 123.
rocks below the Acropolis: upon this cavern stands a tripod, and b It is a remarkable coincidence, that in this plan of Stuart

within it is Apollo and Diana destroving the children of Niobe.' and Revett, the Arcs drawn from the extremities of the inferred

- The above passa-e more probably describes the cavern against diameter of the orchestra at d, a, e, parallel to the scene, with the

which the architecture of the Monument of Thrasyllus is applied. same radius as the circle of the orchestra, meeting the prolonged

The tripod with the story of Niobe attached to it, may have been base f, g, of the inscribed square parallel to the same, which

fixed in the lap of the colossal figure of Bacchus, now in the forms, according to Vitruvius, the boundary of the proscenium

RririA Museum ■ if indeed, the tripod were not placed over the (finitio proscenii), should correspond, at their points of meeting

buM ng antecedently to the figure itself. [>•] that base line, with the dimensions here given of the opening of

i This probably alludes to the sketches mentioned in note -, the proscenium; in accordance with the diagram for the forma-

p. 78.

|>D.] tion of the Greek theatre drawn by Perrault, from the description