Classical Archaeology: Greek Architecture
NOTES ON GREEK ARCHITECTURE (adapted after notes from John Humphrey's class
on Hellenistic and Roman Architecture)
Building Technique
Greek architecture relied upon the post and lintel type of construction, which meant that wide spans
were not
possible, in contrast to the vaults and domes of Roman architecture. A large building,
then, needed supports at close intervals.
Early Temples
  The earliest temples lacked surrounding
colonnades and were made of perishable materials (wood, thatching, etc.). The first
known example of a temple with a surrounding colonnade was the temple of Hera
(Heraion) at Samos (750). Before the seventh century, temples were built entirely of wood
with the exception of mud brick walls standing on stone footings (base) (e.g., the first
temple of Apollo at Thermon. By the sixth century, temples were being built almost
entirely of sone except for the roof beams. The appearance of stone architecture on a
monumental scale was due to contact Greeks had with Egypt in the seventh century. The
Egyptians had a long tradition of stone monumental architecture dating to the third
millennium BCE. Rather then innovate with types of support and materials, Greek
architects, particularly in the Doric order, chose to refine the details and proportions of their
post and lintel structures until they achieved the "perfection" (see Parthenon) of the fifth century.
Doric Order
 Its development can be traced through the
temple of Apollo at
Syracuse (c. 590) with stout columns placed close togther. The metopes (in the frieze zone) do not fall
over the columns; the temple of
Apollo at Corinth (540) with
thick, heavy columns 4 and one third lower diameters in height, monolithic shafts and three
necking grooves at the top of the shaft; the temple of Aphaia on Aegina (490) (an
island off the Attic coast) with two rows of interior columns in two tiers; and finally the
temple of Zeus at Olympia (460)
Features of a good fith century, doric temple, starting from the bottom:
- euthynteria
- crepis of three steps forming the stylobate
- Doric columns, normally with six on short ends and 13 on the dies; have no bases; 20
flutes meeting in a sharp aris; monolithic shafts rare after 6th century
- necking grooves at the top of the shaft;
- then the doric capital consists of an echinus (cushion) and square abacus which
supported the entablature. The distance between the columns was half their
height;
- the entablature was less than a third of a column height and divided into three parts--
architrave, frieze and the cornice with the proportions of 2:2:1.
- In the frieze there was one triglyph over each column and one between so that the
intervening metopes were approximately square.
- In the cornice there was one mutule over each triglyph and one between. Architrave,
frieze and cornice make up the entablature.
- Above the cornice at short ends were pediments. Pediments were crowned with a sima
and raking cornice. The center of the pediment, the tympanum, often had sculptures.
- Problems of corner triglyph solved by placing the corner column inwards.
- Columns bulged about two thirds of the way up (entasis) and leaned slightly inwards
to correct optical distortion.
Later Developments of the Doric Order:
Relationship between the lower diameter of the column and the height of the column
moved from 1:4.7 in the temple of Zeus at Olympia, and 1:6.4 on the temple of Zeus at
Nemea (330 BCE) and 1:6.2 in the temple of Athena Alea at Tegea (Peloponnesos)
Ionic Order
Doric was traditional on mainland Greece until the fourth century BCE, but in Ionia (Asia
Minor, that is, modern day Turkey) Ionic had been undergoing its own development. In
the later 5th century Doric and Ionic could found on the same temple (e.g., Parthenon,
Propylaia (Gateway) of the Athenian Akropolis)
The archaic temple of Artemis at Ephesus (c. 550), where the Ionic columns stood on high
Asiatic bases with double scotia and thick fluted torus (scotia is the concave part, torus the
convex molding). Each column had a vast number of flutes--40-48 (why do you think the
architects had so many flutes per column?). The echinus of the capital was decorated with
a bead and reel and egg and dart molding. The volutes spread very wide; there was no
central oculus (eye); the abacus was oblong. [see page 156 in Pedley, Greek Art and
Archaeology, second edition (1998)]
Attic elements infiltrate the Ionic order in the Propylaia of the
Akropolis at Athens (437--never finished). The column bases are Attic, with the spreading of the concave
member of the bottom; this is also seen in the temple of Athena Nike on the
Akropolis and the temple of Apollo at Bassai, with the upper part of the column base
having torus, scotia, then another torus. The upper torus projects less than the lower one and is
decorated quite often, for example byn a guilloche in the Erectheion. The shaft has 24
flutes divided by fillets (flat bands), not by sharp ridges (arrises) which are found in Doric.
The echinus (cushion) has egg and dart molding. The volutes are tightly wound and have a
central oculus in the middle (of the volute); the volutes are exactly one lower diameter apart.
The canalis (channel) sags heavily in the middle over the shaft of the column. The abacus
is almost square.
The typical Ionic base, on the other hand, is perhaps best seen
in the temple of Athena Polias at Priene; it has a double scotia on the bottom, and then a torus above. The
base rests on a square plinth. There are still 24 flutes.
The column is now almost 9 lower diameters in height, much taller than Doric even though
Doric has grown taller and thinner by the fourth century.
The architrave in fourth century Ionic is divided into three steps, each projecting slightly; as
in many Asiatic buildings of the Ionic order, there is no frieze, but instead the dentils (teeth)
are strongly emphasized with egg and dart molding above and below them. These dentils
take the place of a proper frieze in Ionic. Lion head spouts in the sima above give rhythm
to the entablature and allow the water to drain off the roof.
Main Differences Between Doric and Ionic
- The Ionic order is always taller and more slender than Doric.
- Ionic columns have profiled bases; Doric columns have no bases in the classical
period.
- The system of fluting is quite different; fillets in Ionic, arrises in Doric.
- Architrave in Ionic is stepped, not plain, and divided into three wide bands (known as
fasciae).
- The cornice is marked by a range of close-set projecting blocks knows as dentils
below the main projectiion of the cornice; these take the place of a frieze (triglyph and
metope in Doric).