Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T13:35:22.984Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Columns in Antis in the Temple on the Ilissus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2013

Anthony A. Barrett  and
Michael Vickers
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The small Ionic temple that once stood on the banks of the Ilissus has now all but disappeared. Converted into a Christian church during the Turkish occupation, it was completely dismantled in 1778 to provide material for the new fortification walls of Athens. Fortunately, before its final destruction the temple was visited by the English travellers J. Stuart and N. Revett and its appearance, plan (Fig. 1), and dimensions have been preserved by their careful drawings.

Scholars were immediately reminded of these drawings when, in 1834, the remains of the Temple of Nike on the Acropolis were discovered (Fig. 2). The close relationship between the two temples and the likelihood that both were the products of the same architect, Callicrates, have since then been generally acknowledged, and a detailed study of the points of similarity has been made more recently by I. M. Shear.

Type
Research Article
Information
Annual of the British School at Athens , Volume 70 , November 1975 , pp. 11 - 16
Copyright
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Travlos, J., Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Athens (London, 1971) 112–13Google Scholar, for a description of the site and bibliography. The temple is usually identified with the Metroon in Agrai, a local centre for the celebration of the Mysteries; Travlos argues that the site is not close enough to the river on whose banks the mystic rites are said to have taken place, and follows Dörpfeld in identifying the temple as that of Artemis Agrotera.

2 The Antiquities of Athens i (London, 1762) chap. ii.

3 Ross, L., Schaubert, E., Hansen, G., Der Tempel der Nike Apteros (Berlin, 1839).Google Scholar

4 ‘Kallikrates’, Hesperia xxxii (1963) 375–424.

5 The only other surviving example is the Temple of the Athenians on Delos, which may also have been designed by Callicrates (see Shear, op. cit., n. 4, 399–408).

6 Carpenter, Rhys, The Architects of the Parthenon (London, 1970) 88Google Scholar, notes that the proportional difference was 3:32: there being 16 fingers in a Greek foot, this produces a difference of fingers to the foot.

7 The inner architrave between the pronaos and front columns of the Ilissus Temple was divided into 3 fasciae, inside the pronaos into 2 fasciae. Elsewhere, it was left plain.

8 The Architecture of Ancient Greece (London, 1950), 185, n. 2.

9 Skias, A. N., Praktika 1897, pl. 1.Google Scholar

10 Reported by Blegen, E. P., AJA I (1946) 374Google Scholar, fig. 1.

11 See, for example, Carpenter, op. cit. 90: ‘rectangular piers … [are’ … well assured for Ilissos.

12 On the frieze, see Skias, A. N., Eph. Arch., 1894, 133–42Google Scholar; Studniczka, F., ‘Zu den Friesplatten vom ionischen Tempel am Ilissos’, JdI xxxi (1916) 169–230Google Scholar; Möbius, H., ‘Zu Ilissosfries und Nikebalustrade’, AM lii (1928) 1–8Google Scholar, and ‘Das Metroon in Agrai und sein Fries’, AM lx–lxi (1935–6) 234–68.

13 See Berve, H. and Gruben, G., Greek Temples, Theatres and Shrines (London, 1963) 385.Google Scholar

14 Once the experiment with piers had been made successfully in the Temple of Nike, it may well be that Callicrates decided to repeat it in the Temple of the Athenians at Delos, which has four piers in antis, corresponding to the engaged pilasters in the rear wall.

15 AM xxii (1897) 227–8; Skias, A. N., Praktika, 1897, 73–85.Google Scholar

16 See Dinsmoor, op. cit. 185 n. 3.

17 ‘Zwei Säulenbasen’, AM lxxvi (1961) 15–21.

18 Ross provided the following dimensions for the column bases of the Temple of Nike: upper torus, II·I cm., scotta, 11·3 cm., lower torus, 4·8 cm.

19 The measurements of Stuart and Revett have been converted into metric terms. On the basis of the information provided by Stuart and Revett and by Mallwitz it is possible to compare one aspect of the horizontal dimensions of the bases: the relationship between the upper edge of the scotia and the innermost point on the central flute of the upper torus. In all three the edge of the scotia projects slightly. The figures are: Ilissus column base, 0·805 em., Ilissus anta base, 0·89 cm.; Base A, 0·925 cm. Because of damage, it is not possible to make a similar comparison on Base B.

20 See Orlandos, A. C., ‘Nouvelles observations sur la construction du Temple d'Aména Niké’, BCH lxxi–lxxii (1947–1948) 7.Google Scholar The same device was also employed on the Erechtheum (see Stevens, G. P. and Paton, J. M., The Erechtheum, Cambridge, Mass., 1927, 19)Google Scholar and on the Temple of Athena at Sunium (see Staes, V., Eph. Arch. 1917, 182 fig. GGoogle Scholar).

21 This problem would not have presented itself in the following century, when dowels were no longer restricted to the centre of the drum and, on occasion, pairs of dowels were inserted on the diameter. Martin, R., Manueld' architecture grecque i (Paris, 1965) 294Google Scholar, notes that the change occurred about the middle of the fourth century B.C.

22 Base A is broken at the edge as far down as 1·625 cm. from the lower surface, Base B as far as 1·75 cm. Note that this is wear at the edges only, and that in itself it provides no clue to any possible wear on the actual surface.

23 A somewhat similar arrangement can be observed in the scant remains of the archaic Doric temple at Pompeii, where two of the columns were found to stand on fluted discs 5 cm. high, carved as part of the stylobate (Koldewey, R. and Puchstein, O., Die griechischen Tempel in Unteritalien und Sicilien, Berlin, 1899, 46Google Scholar).