No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
I. Observations on Pliny's Account of the Temple of Diana at Ephesus. By Thomas Falconer, Esq. of Chester
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 July 2012
Extract
When I engaged myself to some friends to vindicate Pliny in relation to the description of the Temple of Diana at Ephesus, I was not aware how many ingenious writers had discussed the same subject. Having, however, been lately favoured by a learned and noble friend with the Memoirs of the Academy of Cortona, I have read the Marchese de Poleni's curious and instructive paper on this subject, and have also considered Mr. Windham's description of that structure which is published in the sixth volume of the Archæologia. I owe much to these learned persons, but am not discouraged from attempting a farther explanation of the text of Pliny, who, though he may have been sometimes mistaken in Natural History, has illustrated the fine arts with the greatest attention, and the most correct taste. The passage I shall first refer to is that in Book xxxvi, chap. 14.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Society of Antiquaries of London 1792
References
page 3 note (a) These are marked c c in the plan, Plate I.
page 3 note (b) See the plan, letter b.
page 3 note (c) Marked with the letter a in the plan.
page 4 note [d] Diastyli hæc erit compositio cum trium columnarum crassitudinem interco Iumnio interponere possumus, tamquam est Apollinis ac Dianæ ædis. Vitruv 1. iii. c. 2.
page 5 note [e] For this we have the authority of Pliny confirmed by Vitruvius.
page 5 note [f] Quot intercolumnia sunt in fronte, totidem bis intercolumnia siunt in lateribus.Vitruv. L iii, c. 3. He afterwards says, that some had mistaken this rule, and supposed the duplication of the columns was intended; an opinion which he contradicts; and indeed from all the remains of Grecian temples, the columns in the front are an equal number, those on the sides unequal, which ia incompatible with the idea of doubling the columns.
page 6 note [g] In this I follow the plan of all the temples of Greece hitherto described by accurate travellers.
page 7 note [h] Gradus in fronte ita sunt constituendi uti fint semper impares. Vitruv. 1. iii. c. 3.
page 7 note [i] Vitruv. in proemio ad lib, vii.
page 8 note [k] I have been informed that the Coliseo at Rome gives a base to the Doric order: this Sinculariry seems to display great judgement in the designer, as the superincumbent mass demanded greater appearance of solidity. This however was not followed by the ancient architects, and the beautiful gate of Christ Church in Oxford, designed Mr. Wyatt, proves it is not a necessary ornament.
page 9 note [l] I admit the facts of Vitruvius oftener than his reasoning. The origin of the Ionic capital, from the braided hair or curls of the Ionian women, seems too whimsical or too refined to be allowed. May it not be submitted to more sagacious inquirers, if the horns of the ram, a common sacrifice, did not suggest the idea of the volute; for the skulls of the oxen formed the chief ornament of the metope of the Doric frieze in a very early period of Grecian architecture.
page 10 note [m] Pliny, 1. xii. c. 4. t. xvi.c, 40.
page 10 note [n] From an expression of Aristophanes one might as justly conclude the whole temple was of gold.
page 10 note [o] xix, v, 24.
page 11 note [p] It is called by the French Montrance, and sometimes le Soleil. The or namental cover is called a tabernacle.
page 11 note [q] Pliny. 1, xvi c. 40.
page 12 note [r] Pliny, 1. xiv. c. I.
page 12 note [s] Pliny, I. xxxiii. c. 12.
page 13 note [t] Vitruvius mentions small columns above the colonade in the Hypethral temples; but we ought to consider that the cell of Diana's temple was the oldest part of the building, and probably the most simple.
page 13 note [u] Vitruv. 1. iii, c. I.
page 13 note [x] Pliny, H. N. 1. xxxv. c. 5.
page 14 note [y] H. N. 1. xxxiv. c. 8.
page 14 note [z] Vitr. I. x. c. 6, 7.
page 14 note [a] Lib. ii. c. 35.
page 15 note [b] I have seen a citation from Philostratus, but cannot find the place, that there was a covered portico of a sladium in length from the city to the temple. This probably began at the extremity of the suburbs, and was continued to the peribolus; however taken, it is another proof that it was without the walls.
page 15 note [c] Spon. tom. I. p. 332–336.
page 15 note [d] Le Brun, tom. I. 4t0. p. 97.
page 15 note [e] Pocock, tom. II. p. 2. p. 51. pl. 50.
page 16 note [f] Aug. de Civ. Dei, 1. 21. c. 4. D. Laert. v. Aristippi prope sinem.
page 16 note [g] The old bridge at London was said to have been founded on wool-sacks, which some Antiquaries interpret to have been erected by a tax on wool.
page 16 note [h] The idea of an arch is not suggested by the simple form of the oblong Grecian temple. We may add that the remains of ancient buildings in Egypt, and the ruins of Persepolis have none. The first discovery of this improvement is a desideratum in the history of architecure.
page 17 note [k] Strabo, I. iv. p. 179; 1. iii. p. 160.
page 18 note [l] Strabe, I. xiv. p. 640. C. .
page 20 note [m] At present it is read in Diodorus only sixty feet wide, but the proportion of a Grecian Temple obliges us to suppose that a numeral letter signifying 100 has been obliterated. Lib. xiii. p, 375.
page 21 note [n] Sec Strabo and Xenophon's Anabasis.