DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4266#0008
6 DESCRIPTION OF PLATES.
the bases of the columns,) that the doors could not have been in any other situation, than in the
intercolumniations at the extremities of the east front, nor does it appear in what part of the flanks any
other doors might have existed ; the west front being wholly destroyed, gives no light on the subject.
We may hazard the conjecture that in the centre of the Peribolus an altar might have been
raised, similar to that in the Temple of Jupiter Serapis, in Puzzuoli, which would have occupied the
central space of the east front—trophies or statues may probably have been placed in the intercolumnia-
tions.
The remains of the Cella point out a similar system of construction with the external peristyle,
and the western transverse wall is clearly seen, but no traces whatever of the disposition of the eastern
end.
The porticoes appear to have ranged along the north and south sides of the temple only, con-
nected probably at the ends; they formed the magnificent galleries, of which the height and space
(332 feet long, 41 wide, and 68 feet high) are so justly praised by Diodorus Siculus ; affording a cool
retreat in the warm climate of Sicily, and a spacious receptacle for those works of sculpture and
painting in which Agrigentum was so rich.
The walls of the Cella extended to the east and west fronts, and formed an essential support
to the additional elevation of the pediments charged with sculpture.
As the account given us by Diodorus Siculus of the particulars of the construction of this
temple is so accurate, we are disappointed in finding that his dimensions (in English feet 342..5,75 in
length, by 60\.5,25 in breadth, and 120..10,5 in height) accord so little with the actual admeasure-
ments of the building. We must conclude therefore, either that the text has been corrupted, or
that he did not himself measure the temple, but accepted the inaccurate account of his conductor.
PLATE II.
Is the elevation of the eastern front; those of the Parthenon and the Temple of Concord are repre-
sented upon the same scale, in order to shew their comparative magnitudes.
The height of the Podium b, the bases, and the caps of the columns, the entablature, as also the
angle of inclination of the pediment, are ascertained by actual admeasurement; the only dimension
left to conjecture is that of the shaft, which is presumed to be in the same proportion with that of
Concord, and the temples of Agrigentum generally.
The proportion of the column varies very much in the different cities of Greece, but very
slightly however in the different examples found in each of those cities. Thus, in Athens all the
temples are about 5| diameters. In Selinus they are from 5 to 5\ diameters. At Agrigentum 44
diameters. At Egina 5 diameters.
Thus a local proportion seems to have prevailed, and it can hardly be supposed that any dif-
ference would be made in the proportion of this temple, the more, as these columns being little more
than half a diameter, present a more slender proportion in their profile.
The doors have been placed in the angles for the reasons stated in the preceding description,
and the windows in the intercolumnia are introduced arbitrarily; there could be no other mode of
lighting the porticos, which Diodorus Siculus assures us were designed to have been roofed.
The large stones forming the lintels are still attached to the fallen mass of the capital and en-
a The commentators have condemned this dimension as an b Diodorus Siculus uses the term K?Wi^a. The podium is
error of the transcriber, and ought to have stood 16]. 2 (Eng- traced all round the site of the building, and there is no found-
lish), but it is to be remarked in its defence, that the best copies ation whatever in the existing remains to suppose there was an
have this dimension written, and not expressed by numerals; it isolated portico; the nature of the material before described pre-
is possible therefore, that it may have applied to the width of the eludes the possibility of an open portico,
naos, properly so called, exclusive of the porticoes.
the bases of the columns,) that the doors could not have been in any other situation, than in the
intercolumniations at the extremities of the east front, nor does it appear in what part of the flanks any
other doors might have existed ; the west front being wholly destroyed, gives no light on the subject.
We may hazard the conjecture that in the centre of the Peribolus an altar might have been
raised, similar to that in the Temple of Jupiter Serapis, in Puzzuoli, which would have occupied the
central space of the east front—trophies or statues may probably have been placed in the intercolumnia-
tions.
The remains of the Cella point out a similar system of construction with the external peristyle,
and the western transverse wall is clearly seen, but no traces whatever of the disposition of the eastern
end.
The porticoes appear to have ranged along the north and south sides of the temple only, con-
nected probably at the ends; they formed the magnificent galleries, of which the height and space
(332 feet long, 41 wide, and 68 feet high) are so justly praised by Diodorus Siculus ; affording a cool
retreat in the warm climate of Sicily, and a spacious receptacle for those works of sculpture and
painting in which Agrigentum was so rich.
The walls of the Cella extended to the east and west fronts, and formed an essential support
to the additional elevation of the pediments charged with sculpture.
As the account given us by Diodorus Siculus of the particulars of the construction of this
temple is so accurate, we are disappointed in finding that his dimensions (in English feet 342..5,75 in
length, by 60\.5,25 in breadth, and 120..10,5 in height) accord so little with the actual admeasure-
ments of the building. We must conclude therefore, either that the text has been corrupted, or
that he did not himself measure the temple, but accepted the inaccurate account of his conductor.
PLATE II.
Is the elevation of the eastern front; those of the Parthenon and the Temple of Concord are repre-
sented upon the same scale, in order to shew their comparative magnitudes.
The height of the Podium b, the bases, and the caps of the columns, the entablature, as also the
angle of inclination of the pediment, are ascertained by actual admeasurement; the only dimension
left to conjecture is that of the shaft, which is presumed to be in the same proportion with that of
Concord, and the temples of Agrigentum generally.
The proportion of the column varies very much in the different cities of Greece, but very
slightly however in the different examples found in each of those cities. Thus, in Athens all the
temples are about 5| diameters. In Selinus they are from 5 to 5\ diameters. At Agrigentum 44
diameters. At Egina 5 diameters.
Thus a local proportion seems to have prevailed, and it can hardly be supposed that any dif-
ference would be made in the proportion of this temple, the more, as these columns being little more
than half a diameter, present a more slender proportion in their profile.
The doors have been placed in the angles for the reasons stated in the preceding description,
and the windows in the intercolumnia are introduced arbitrarily; there could be no other mode of
lighting the porticos, which Diodorus Siculus assures us were designed to have been roofed.
The large stones forming the lintels are still attached to the fallen mass of the capital and en-
a The commentators have condemned this dimension as an b Diodorus Siculus uses the term K?Wi^a. The podium is
error of the transcriber, and ought to have stood 16]. 2 (Eng- traced all round the site of the building, and there is no found-
lish), but it is to be remarked in its defence, that the best copies ation whatever in the existing remains to suppose there was an
have this dimension written, and not expressed by numerals; it isolated portico; the nature of the material before described pre-
is possible therefore, that it may have applied to the width of the eludes the possibility of an open portico,
naos, properly so called, exclusive of the porticoes.