timent of Vitruvius on the origin and the epoch of the different orders of architecture invented by the Greeks. "Anciently," fays he, "they were ignorant of the art "of proportioning the various parts of a building: they "ufed columns, but they cut them at hazard, without · "rules, without principles, and without having any atten"tion to the proportions which they ought to give them : "they placed them likewise without any regard to the o"ther parts of the edifice. Dorus, fon of Helen and "grandfon of Deucalion *, having caufed a temple to "be built at Argos in honour of Juno; that edifice was "found by chance to be conftructed according to the taste "and the proportions of the order which afterwards they "called Doric. The form of this building having appear"ed agreeable, they conformed to it for the construction "of edifices which they afterwards had to build a. "About the fame time," adds Vitruvius," the Athe"nians fent into Afia a colony under the conduct of Ion, "nephew of Dorus +: this undertaking had very good "fuccefs. Ion feized on Caria, and there founded many "cities: thefe new inhabitants thought to build temples. "They propofed for a model that of Juno at Argos; but "ignorant of the proportion which they ought to give to "the columns, and in general to the whole edifice, they "fought for rules capable of regulating their operation. "These people wanted, in making their columns fufficient"ly ftrong to fupport the whole edifice, to render them at "the fame time agreeable to the fight. For this purpose, "they thought to have given it the fame proportion "that they found between the foot of a man and the reft of his body. According to their ideas, the foot "made a fixth part of the human height: in confe"quence, they gave at first to a Doric column, taking "in its chapiter, fix of its diameters; that is to fay, * He was king of all Peloponnefus, and lived about 1522 years before Chrift. Vitruv. 1. 4. c. I. Ion was fon of Xuthus, brother of Dorus. "they с "they made it fix times as high as it was thick after"wards they added to it a seventh diameter *. "This new order of architecture was not long in giving "birth to a fecond: they would immediately go beyond "their firft invention. The Ionians (it is Vitruvius who "ftill fpeaks) tried to throw ftill more delicacy and ele66 gance into their edifices. They employed the fame " method which they had before put in practice for the "compofition of the Doric order: but instead of taking "for a model the body of a man, the Ionians were regu"lated by that of a woman. With a view to make the "columns of this new order more agreeable and more "pleafing, they gave them eight times as much height as "they had diameter. They alfo made channelings all ❝along the trunk to imitate the folds of the robes of wor "men: the volutes of the chapiter reprefented that part " of the hair which hung in curls on each fide of the face. "The Ionians added, laftly, to thefe columns a base "which was not in ufe in the Doric order." According to Vitruvius, these bases were made in the manner of twisted cords, as a kind of cafe for the columns. This order of architecture was called Ionic from the name of the people who had invented it. This is what Vitruvius relates of the origin and epoch of the Doric and Ionic orders: he makes it afcend as we have seen, to very early times. I fhall not stop to fhew the little refemblance to truth. there is in this whole narration; but whatever had been the origin of these two orders, I think we cannot refer them to the ages in which Vitruvius has placed them. We e Vitruv. 1. 4. c. 1. Vitruv. ibid.; Plin. 1. 36. fect. 56. p. 755. At that time we may fay, that the Doric column had the proportion of the body of a man. For the foot of a man is at least the seventh part of his height. Vitruv. 1. 4. c. I. Afterwards they gave to thefe columns the height of eight of their diameters. At this time, they have nine, if we include the chapiter and the base. See M. de Chambray, p. 15, 19. & 33.; fee alfo the notes of Perrault on Vitruvius, p, 176. note 6. do do not fee in effect, that Homer, greatly posterior to these times, had the least idea of what we call the orders of architecture. I have already made this remark: I fhall add, that if it had been known, it would very probably have been put in practice. Occafions were presented to him more than once in his poems. Homer fpeaks of temples confecrated to Minerva and to Neptune, and yet he gives no description of them. With respect to palaces, what he has faid does not give an idea of any order or of any defign in architecture. We should not even dare to affirm, that the columns mentioned in these edifices were of ftone; they were only, according to all appearances, fimple pofts. Laftly, the only eulogy which Homer makes of the palace of Ulyffes, confifts in faying that it was very high, that the court was defended by a wall and by a hedge. The poet alfo praises the strength and the folidity of the gates of this palace, giving us to understand, that it was very difficult to force them. He feems to infift much on this article, which was a very ef fential point in the heroic times, on account of the robberies which then were very frequent in Greece. These reflections are fufficient, I think, to make us reject the recital of Vitruvius, too modern an author with relation to the ages of which we now speak, for us to believe his fimple teftimony. It is better to acknowledge our ignorance of the state in which architecture then was in Greece, than to refer to fuch fufpected traditions. h See Iliad. 1. 6. v. 297.; Odyff. 1. 6. v. 266. I See Iliad. 1. 6. v. 242. 1. 20. v. 11.; Ody¶ 1. 4. v. 72. &c. I. 7. v. 85. &c. * I remark at first, that Homer never calls these columns sλas, a word which properly fignifies a column of stones; but always xiovas, which can only be understood of posts of wood. I fhall obferve, in the second place, that they drove pegs into these columns to hang different utenfils upon, and that they there contrived cavities proper to keep different arms in. Odyff. 1. 22. v. 176. &c. 1. 8. v. 66, &c. l. 1. V. 127. &c, l. 19. v. 38. But, moreover, Homer willing to give us an idea of the largeness of an olivetree which fupported the bed of Ulyffes, compares it to a column; and it is there to be remarked, that he uses the word xíwv, to defign that column. Odyff. 1. 23. V. 191. * Odyff. 1, 17. v. 264, &c. CHA P. CHA P. IV. Of Metallurgy. Hiftorians are not agreed about the time in which the art of working of metals became known in Greece. Some make this discovery afcend to the most early ages, others place it in ages much more recent: thefe contradictions nevertheless are only in appearance. It is easy, by diftinguishing the spirit and the motives of these traditions, to reconcile the recitals which at first appear the most oppofite. I think, that the knowledge of metals, and the art of working them, had originally been brought into Greece by the Titan princes: many facts feem to favour this conjecture. The Greeks, according to fome authors, attribute to Sol the fon of the Ocean, the difcovery of gold *. I have already faid, that anciently they called fons of the Ocean, those who from time immemorial had come by fea into a country. It was by this way, that the Titans had come into Greece they came out of Egypt. The Egyptians attribute to their ancient fovereigns the difcovery of metallurgy : they had deified them in acknowledgment of that invention, and of many others which thefe monarchs had imparted to their people ". A prince whofe name the Greeks have rendered by that of Elios, and the Romans, by that of Sol, had been, by the confeffion of almoft all hiftorians, the first who had reigned in Egypt. This monarch was also regarded as the most ancient divinity in the country o. Gold was the firft metal that men have known. Nothing hinders us to believe, that the prince of whom we now speak, had fhewn to the Egyptians the manner of working this metal, I even think to find a proof of it in the relation which at all times has been established between the Sun, the name of an Egyptian mo. * Gellius apud Plin. 1. 7. fect. 57. p. 414. 1 See part 1. book 1. art. 5. n Diod. 1. 1. p. 17. Ibid, book 2. chap. 4. 0 Ibid. Ee See part 1. book 2. chap. 4. narch, harch, and gold. The art of working of metal was brought into Greece by the Titans, and under the aufpices of the Sun: these princes came by fea. This was enough to make the Greeks fay afterwards, that the difcovery of gold had been communicated to them by Sol fon of the Ocean. We may confider in the fame point of view, what they related of the discovery of filver: they faid they were indebted for it to Erichthonius . This prince, according to the tradition of the Greeks, was the fon of Vulcan . No one is ignorant, that the Egyptians revered Vulcan as one of their most ancient divinities; who was looked upon to have invented fire, and who among the Greeks was thought to prefide at all the operations of metallurgy ". With refpect to copper, the first who worked that metal in Greece, were, according to fome authors, workmen brought by Saturn and Jupiter. *. We fee, lastly, that, from a very ancient tradition, Prometheus passed for having learned the Greeks the art of working in metals . We know, that this person, so famous in antiquity, was cotem, porary with the Titans. All these facts then seem to declare, that the first knowledge of metallurgy had been brought into Greece by the Titan princes; and it is after this ancient tradition, that the authors have spoken, who made the art of working of metals afcend to the first ages of Greece. I have already remarked on many occafions, that the reign of the Titans had been very fhort, whofe fall had drawn along with it, that of the knowledge, which these ftrangers had imparted to Greece 2. There must have new colonies come from Egypt and from Afia to re-establish, or, to speak better, to re-create the arts in that part of Europe. Cadmus ought to be looked upon as the firft who renewed in Greece the art of working of metals. This prince dif covered in Thrace, at the foot of Mount Pargæus, mines of * Plin. 1. 7. fect. 57. p. 414. Apollodor. I. 3. p. 196. × Strabo, 1. 14. p. 966.; Stephan. in voce Aidntos, p. 38. y Æfchil. in Prometh. vincto, v. 501. &c. See part 1. book 1. art 5. Diod. 1. 1. p. 17. gold. |