- Greek Archaeology, Greek Architecture, Greek Sculpture, Ancient Greek History, Architectural History, Archaic sculpture, and 14 moreArchitectural Sculpture, Greek temples, History of Science, History of Archaeology, History of architecture, Roman Archaeology, Archaic Greece, Ionia, Archaic Ionic Architecture, Greek sanctuaries, Hellenistic and Roman Fortifications, Illyrian Archaeology, Monumental Sculpture, and Monumental Architectureedit
'Chapters': • Pre-monumental Architecture in Ionia: Fortifications, 'Antenhäuser' and Stoas in the Geometric and Early Archaic Periods • The Birth of Monumental Ionian Architecture on the Cyclades: Sacred Buildings of the Archaic Period... more
'Chapters':
• Pre-monumental Architecture in Ionia: Fortifications, 'Antenhäuser' and Stoas in the Geometric and Early Archaic Periods
• The Birth of Monumental Ionian Architecture on the Cyclades: Sacred Buildings of the Archaic Period in 'Island Ionia' and their Impulses on Eastern Ionian Architecture
• The Breakthrough to Monumentality or "Colossality" in the Architecture of Ionia: Archaic Limestone and Marble dipteroi and their Competition
• The Heyday of Ionian Architecture in Sanctuaries and Metropolises: Late Archaic Temples, Altars, City Walls, and Living Quarters, and the Ionic Order in the 6th Century BC
- Marble & Monumentality
- Construction Boom
- On the Ionic Order in the 6th Century BC
• The Adoption of the Ionic Order in Attica and the Peloponnese: Classical Period Buildings in Athens and Arcadia and the Creation of the Attic Column Base and the Corinthian Capital
• The So-called Ionian Renaissance in Caria and Ionia and World Wonders of the Ionic Order: Late Classical Androns, Tombs, and Temples and the Return to archaic Architecture
• Pre-monumental Architecture in Ionia: Fortifications, 'Antenhäuser' and Stoas in the Geometric and Early Archaic Periods
• The Birth of Monumental Ionian Architecture on the Cyclades: Sacred Buildings of the Archaic Period in 'Island Ionia' and their Impulses on Eastern Ionian Architecture
• The Breakthrough to Monumentality or "Colossality" in the Architecture of Ionia: Archaic Limestone and Marble dipteroi and their Competition
• The Heyday of Ionian Architecture in Sanctuaries and Metropolises: Late Archaic Temples, Altars, City Walls, and Living Quarters, and the Ionic Order in the 6th Century BC
- Marble & Monumentality
- Construction Boom
- On the Ionic Order in the 6th Century BC
• The Adoption of the Ionic Order in Attica and the Peloponnese: Classical Period Buildings in Athens and Arcadia and the Creation of the Attic Column Base and the Corinthian Capital
• The So-called Ionian Renaissance in Caria and Ionia and World Wonders of the Ionic Order: Late Classical Androns, Tombs, and Temples and the Return to archaic Architecture
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
The archaic temple of Apollo (›temple II‹) at Didyma is one of the four archaic Ionic dipteroi built as exceptional monumental sacred buildings in three of Ionia’s most significant sanctuaries (Samos, Didyma, and Ephesus) during the... more
The archaic temple of Apollo (›temple II‹) at Didyma is one of the four archaic Ionic dipteroi built as exceptional monumental sacred buildings in three of Ionia’s most significant sanctuaries (Samos, Didyma, and Ephesus) during the second and third quarter of the 6th century B.C. The sanctuaries competed with one another for a few decades. Whereas in its first construction phase, the archaic Didymeion followed the example of the first dipteros in the Heraion of Samos and was constructed in limestone and marl, in its second phase it was adorned with a magnificent marble front according to the models of the Artemision of Ephesus and the archaic temple at Myus.
The large number and the relatively good preservation of about 800 significant architectural and sculptural fragments attributed to the temple and its altar allow to reconstruct the temple’s ground plan and elevation. The fragments in question especially compose of different groups of columns and various types of column bases and capitals with different diameters, consisting of both limestone and marble. According to the oracle cult the exceptional archaic Apollon temple (›temple II‹) anticipated significant rooms sequences, column forms, and other characteristics of the Hellenistic Apollo temple (›temple III‹).
The three limestone column groups based on differences in diameters and flute numbers (24, 28, 32) give significant insight into the Ionic art of building in the 6th century B.C. Thus, at the Didymeion the number of the flutes was evidently adapted to the column diameter, whereas the width of the flutes remained constant – as by contrast to standards in classical and Hellenistic times, when conversely the number of 24 flutes was constant whilst their width was adapted to the column diameter. This important observation is not only valid for the columns of the Apollo temple and the other dipteroi, but also for the columns of most other Ionic sacred buildings of the 6th century B.C. For that matter, a so-to-speak »Greek dis-order« can be no question of.
The detailed examination of the excellent architectural sculpture and the exact documentation of the few fragments of the columnae caelatae allow a reconstruction of the korai at the feet of the marble columns. Surprisingly, they come in two different sizes, one being almost life-size and the other by one third smaller.
The new discovery of a fragment from a marl column drum displaying a charioteer in relief reveals that already in its first construction phase the Apollo temple had columns with figurative decorations, although these were located at the columns’ necks. According to a recent discovery of a miniature votive column in the Heraion of Samos showing an engraved animal frieze at the neck, the columns of the Apollo temple had with regard to shape and decoration apparently stood in the tradition of the Samian votive columns. The figuratively decorated drums of the necks of the limestone columns from the first construction phase of the archaic Didymeion most likely inspired the creation of the famous columnae caelatae at the feet of the marble columns of the Didymeion and the archaic Artemision.
The large number and the relatively good preservation of about 800 significant architectural and sculptural fragments attributed to the temple and its altar allow to reconstruct the temple’s ground plan and elevation. The fragments in question especially compose of different groups of columns and various types of column bases and capitals with different diameters, consisting of both limestone and marble. According to the oracle cult the exceptional archaic Apollon temple (›temple II‹) anticipated significant rooms sequences, column forms, and other characteristics of the Hellenistic Apollo temple (›temple III‹).
The three limestone column groups based on differences in diameters and flute numbers (24, 28, 32) give significant insight into the Ionic art of building in the 6th century B.C. Thus, at the Didymeion the number of the flutes was evidently adapted to the column diameter, whereas the width of the flutes remained constant – as by contrast to standards in classical and Hellenistic times, when conversely the number of 24 flutes was constant whilst their width was adapted to the column diameter. This important observation is not only valid for the columns of the Apollo temple and the other dipteroi, but also for the columns of most other Ionic sacred buildings of the 6th century B.C. For that matter, a so-to-speak »Greek dis-order« can be no question of.
The detailed examination of the excellent architectural sculpture and the exact documentation of the few fragments of the columnae caelatae allow a reconstruction of the korai at the feet of the marble columns. Surprisingly, they come in two different sizes, one being almost life-size and the other by one third smaller.
The new discovery of a fragment from a marl column drum displaying a charioteer in relief reveals that already in its first construction phase the Apollo temple had columns with figurative decorations, although these were located at the columns’ necks. According to a recent discovery of a miniature votive column in the Heraion of Samos showing an engraved animal frieze at the neck, the columns of the Apollo temple had with regard to shape and decoration apparently stood in the tradition of the Samian votive columns. The figuratively decorated drums of the necks of the limestone columns from the first construction phase of the archaic Didymeion most likely inspired the creation of the famous columnae caelatae at the feet of the marble columns of the Didymeion and the archaic Artemision.
Research Interests:
Herodotus (6.19) reports that after the conquest of Miletus in 494 B.C. by the Persian king Darius “the temple at Didyma with its shrine and place of divination was plundered and burnt.” This literary source, the temple was »burnt«, in... more
Herodotus (6.19) reports that after the conquest of Miletus in 494 B.C. by the Persian king Darius “the temple at Didyma with its shrine and place of divination was plundered and burnt.” This literary source, the temple was »burnt«, in this instance meaning »destroyed«, is questioned by the archaeological evidence. Though, there are some architectural fragments of the archaic Apollo temple (›temple II‹) discoloured by fire or actually burnt, which undoubtedly testify to a fire, just a small portion of, e. g., column drums show these traces amounting to approximately 30 %.
Obviously at a later post-Archaic time, the architecture of the just damaged archaic temple was systematically shattered. Since hundreds of well preserved archaic architectural fragments were found shattered and ›buried‹ in the shafts of the foundations of the Hellenistic temple (›temple III‹), this systematic dissambly could not have taken place earlier than in the Late Classical or Early Hellenistic period, when the construction of the successor was started and the archaic temple was step-by-step dismantled.
At Didyma can be recognized a differentiated, mainly economically motivated handling with the architectural fragments of the archaic Apollo temple. But the reason for the ›recycling‹ of the fragments of its large altar was not an economic, but more probably a historical-commemorative and sacral one, because the significant altar cyma was reused on the temple terrace wall and exhibited on an altar-like high base at the former site of the archaic altar probably badly damaged by the Persians. This ›monument‹ referred pars pro toto back to the most important sacred building of the archaic sanctuary.
Obviously at a later post-Archaic time, the architecture of the just damaged archaic temple was systematically shattered. Since hundreds of well preserved archaic architectural fragments were found shattered and ›buried‹ in the shafts of the foundations of the Hellenistic temple (›temple III‹), this systematic dissambly could not have taken place earlier than in the Late Classical or Early Hellenistic period, when the construction of the successor was started and the archaic temple was step-by-step dismantled.
At Didyma can be recognized a differentiated, mainly economically motivated handling with the architectural fragments of the archaic Apollo temple. But the reason for the ›recycling‹ of the fragments of its large altar was not an economic, but more probably a historical-commemorative and sacral one, because the significant altar cyma was reused on the temple terrace wall and exhibited on an altar-like high base at the former site of the archaic altar probably badly damaged by the Persians. This ›monument‹ referred pars pro toto back to the most important sacred building of the archaic sanctuary.
Research Interests:
Research Interests: Greek Archaeology, Ancient Greek Religion, Archaic Greek history, Ancient Greek History, Ancient Greek and Roman Art, and 10 moreIonia, Archaic Greece, Geometric and archaic Greece, Persian Wars, Ancient Greek Architecture, Archaeology of destruction, archaic and classical architecture of Ionia and Aiolis, Didyma, Ionian Revolt, and Ancient Greek Sculpture
Research Interests:
Research Interests:
"From the σκέπαρνον to the claw chisel - work traces on limestone, marl, and marble fragments from the archaic Didymaion (and Archaic sculptures)" An ensemble of about 650 worked architectural stone fragments dating to the middle of the... more
"From the σκέπαρνον to the claw chisel - work traces on limestone, marl, and marble fragments from the archaic Didymaion (and Archaic sculptures)"
An ensemble of about 650 worked architectural stone fragments dating to the middle of the 6th century B.C. (c. 570/560–540/530 B.C.) are ascribable to the archaic Apollo temple at Didyma and its altar. About 80–85 % of these fragments are of limestone and lime marl, and only 15–20 % of marble. For economic reasons the different local stone materials had been extracted in the neighbourhood of the sanctuary as well as in the nearby marble quarries of Heracleia at Latmus and Myus. They were used side by side in the same building, just like in the case of second dipteros in the Heraion of Samos (›Polycratic temple‹) and the Apollo temple V at Delphi (›Alcmaeonid temple‹).
Initially, the design, the materials, as well as the technique of the Apollo temple at Didyma had been much influenced by the first dipteros on Samos (›Theodoros temple‹), as its construction had begun with limestone and lime marl materials. But from about 560/550 B.C., two marble temples, the lower temple at Myus and the older Artemision at Ephesos, then became the models. After a plan modification, the Didymaion and its naiskos thus received magnificent marble facades with Ionic column bases of the Ephesian type as well as Ionic volute capitals.
Compared to the fragments of the other archaic dipteroi, the worked pieces from the Apollo temple are numerous and well-preserved and display a wide range of different work traces at their surfaces, especially at the anathyroses of the inside contact faces. From the quarries to the construction site at the temple, the first building phase, or the so-called ›limestone phase‹, is marked by a predominant use of an all-round one-hand tool, being an adze or hatchet called the σκέπαρνον, and more frequent also by that of a pickaxe or point. The second building phase referred to as the ›marble phase‹ is characterized by the predominant use of the pick and the point, and still occasionally by the meanwhile more hardened σκέπαρνον, as well as by a comparatively late, fine claw chisel after about 540/530 B.C. However, the beginning of the construction at around 570/560 B.C. also reveals a temporary and experimental application of a roughly toothed tool used for the dressing of the limestone foundation blocks, which probably consisted of a toothed adze or hatchet similar to a ›toothed σκέπαρνον‹. Traces of this tool, possibly representing an earlier version of the later claw chisel, have also been recorded at the Heraion of Samos about 580 B.C.
An ensemble of about 650 worked architectural stone fragments dating to the middle of the 6th century B.C. (c. 570/560–540/530 B.C.) are ascribable to the archaic Apollo temple at Didyma and its altar. About 80–85 % of these fragments are of limestone and lime marl, and only 15–20 % of marble. For economic reasons the different local stone materials had been extracted in the neighbourhood of the sanctuary as well as in the nearby marble quarries of Heracleia at Latmus and Myus. They were used side by side in the same building, just like in the case of second dipteros in the Heraion of Samos (›Polycratic temple‹) and the Apollo temple V at Delphi (›Alcmaeonid temple‹).
Initially, the design, the materials, as well as the technique of the Apollo temple at Didyma had been much influenced by the first dipteros on Samos (›Theodoros temple‹), as its construction had begun with limestone and lime marl materials. But from about 560/550 B.C., two marble temples, the lower temple at Myus and the older Artemision at Ephesos, then became the models. After a plan modification, the Didymaion and its naiskos thus received magnificent marble facades with Ionic column bases of the Ephesian type as well as Ionic volute capitals.
Compared to the fragments of the other archaic dipteroi, the worked pieces from the Apollo temple are numerous and well-preserved and display a wide range of different work traces at their surfaces, especially at the anathyroses of the inside contact faces. From the quarries to the construction site at the temple, the first building phase, or the so-called ›limestone phase‹, is marked by a predominant use of an all-round one-hand tool, being an adze or hatchet called the σκέπαρνον, and more frequent also by that of a pickaxe or point. The second building phase referred to as the ›marble phase‹ is characterized by the predominant use of the pick and the point, and still occasionally by the meanwhile more hardened σκέπαρνον, as well as by a comparatively late, fine claw chisel after about 540/530 B.C. However, the beginning of the construction at around 570/560 B.C. also reveals a temporary and experimental application of a roughly toothed tool used for the dressing of the limestone foundation blocks, which probably consisted of a toothed adze or hatchet similar to a ›toothed σκέπαρνον‹. Traces of this tool, possibly representing an earlier version of the later claw chisel, have also been recorded at the Heraion of Samos about 580 B.C.