The Erechtheion on the Acropolis of Athens - Essay Example

The Erechtheion on the Acropolis of Athens Whether living in the modern age or at some point in the past, it remains a true statement that “architecture is the unavoidable art” (Roth 3). Human beings for centuries have continued to exist and grow within spaces that we have constructed for ourselves. It is therefore not surprising that the concept of architectural theory has been revealed to be a continuous process. Roth says “architecture is the chambered nautilus shell of the human species; it is the environment we build for ourselves, and which, as we grow in experience and knowledge, we change and adapt to our expanded condition. If we wish to understand ourselves, we must take care not to eliminate the ‘shell’ of our past, for it is the physical record of our aspirations and achievements” (Roth 3). This is a perfect analogy for the buildings we construct because the oldest segments of the nautilus shell are found within the depths of its interior just as the oldest concepts of architecture are still found within the depths of our architectural core theories. What Roth is suggesting is that architectural knowledge of any type must necessarily build upon the work completed in the past and this work remains forever embedded within the frameworks created in the present. As a result, there remains a great deal to be learned from some of the existing architectural works of the ancient past such as the Erechtheion on the Acropolis of Athens. Attempting to trace the architectural theories of the ancients is not as easy as it might seem as there were a number of architects working at the same time, not all of whom worked from the same foundational theories which had yet to be codified. An example of this is best illustrated by more modern examples. Even though we have access to numerous books and articles about Greek art and architecture today, there are still a great number of theories in existence as to what exactly comprises architecture. These theories continue to change with time, material, usage of the structure and so forth. This makes architectural theory even today difficult to standardize. “The majority of programs that purport to be theories of architecture seek to combine aesthetic, social and practical considerations in an integrated whole; the emphasis being either theoretical or practical, according to whether the author is an architect himself, and on whom he is writing for” (Kruft 14). In other words, there seems to be as many theories of architecture today as there are architects and it seems reasonable to assume that this same condition existed in the past as it does now. If there were fewer theories in antiquity, this would be more the result of a fewer number of working architects rather than a limited number of ideas to float around. Extending back even to the ancient Romans, though, architects began to record their theories for the benefit of future generations to build and expand upon. Thus, they are able to continue to contribute to developing thought many years after their physical deaths. These published discussions are invaluable because they reveal the influences of the ancients and reveal some of the common shared theories that may have been employed by the ancient Greeks. An important figure in the recording of these ideas was the Roman Vitruvius. Vitruvius was originally an artillery engineer who worked during the period of Augustus, the first Roman emperor, but he made his name a part of history through his work as an architect and an author. “His ten books on architecture, De Architectura (trans. 1914), are the oldest surviving work on the subject. They consist of dissertations on a wide variety of subjects relating to architecture, engineering, sanitation, practical hydraulics, acoustic vases, and the like. Much of the material appears to have been taken from earlier extinct treatises by Greek architects” (Calter). Within his texts, Vitruvius outlines three basic elements of design he and presumably the Greeks before him considered essential to understanding the meaning of architecture. These basic elements have been referred to since the Renaissance when these works were reintroduced to Western Europe through trade with the East, but they were lost to the world through the church-dominated period of the Middle Ages. These three primary elements are utility, firmness and beauty. “By utility, Vitruvius means the functional arrangement of rooms and spaces so that there is no hindrance to use and so that a building is perfectly adjusted to its site. Firmness referred to foundations that were solid and to building materials being used wisely to do their required work. Beauty meant that ‘the appearance of the work is pleasing and in good taste, and [that] its members are in due proportion according to correct principles of symmetry” (Roth 11). What enables these elements to continue to remain valid through the centuries is the tremendous flexibility of each and the shifting emphasis that can be distributed among them. What makes up the ‘functional arrangement of rooms and spaces’ can changes due to structural purposes, uses, the common social customs observed in engaging in these types of activities and a host of other variables. The availability and type of building materials that can be used have also changed over the years as a result of advances in technology and the creation of processes able to accommodate new ideas for their use. Beauty can be defined as something ‘pleasing and in good taste’ however these concepts are very susceptible to shifting ideals from one population to another and from one individual to another. Pictures or landscape views of the Erechtheion tend to overwhelm modern day and probably ancient viewers with similar initial impressions. There is an immediate sense of its grand scale, the care with which the proportions were calculated and the talent involved in creating the awe-inspiring statuary. The Erechtheion was originally built during the last years of Athens' success as a temple of worship and was intended to replace an older temple that had once stood between the current location of the Erechthion and the site of the Parthenon. Unlike the Parthenon, though, the site of the Erechthion required a great deal of adjustment to the building design in order to respect the locations of various sacred ancient shrines and fountains. In addition, the Erechthion was constructed on uneven ground that couldn't be easily leveled both because of the limitations of available technology and because it was important not to disturb the other shrines and sites in the immediate area. Part of the Erechthion's inspiring affect is created by its heavy use of stairs as the only means of gaining entry and its use of tall columns measured according to the Golden Rule to emphasize its size and perfection of form. Although the Erechthion was constructed in close proximity to the Parthenon which used Doric columns to support its roof, the designer of the Erechthion opted to use Ionic columns which were already considered more modern examples of present technology. In addition to the actual structure, the Erechthion uses life-sized or taller statues as a means of celebrating the greatness of the civilization that achieved it, but this statuary plays a more active role in the structure than merely decoration. The porch at the southwest corner of the building is the site of the famous Caryatids. These are six statues depicting six different women who together support the roof of the porch on their heads. Unfortunately, not much is known about their intended symbolism. In spite of our lack of knowledge about these statues, though, they are the most recognizable feature of the Erechthion. The building was imagined during a brief period of peace and prosperity for Athens and its construction was completed during the final battles Athens fought just before it fell to the Spartans. Although the symbolism isn't fully understood today, it is clear that the Erechthion was created to serve solely as a place of worship. This is because the building's design takes special notice of the pre-existing holy sites at the building's location and makes a special effort to ensure these sites remained available for worship as well. According to Siegel, one example of this is the saltwater spring of Poseidon, believed to have started at the moment the god of the sea struck the earth with his trident. Another example is the olive tree that legend said Athena brought back to life in order to win the honor of the city. The east cella was dedicated to worship of the goddess Athena Polias. “The Panathenaic Procession terminated here, where the olive wood cult statue of Athena was draped in the peplos offered by the Arrephoroi, elite young Athenian girls hand-picked for this sacred duty” (Siegel). The southwest side of the building was designed to sit directly above the Grave of Cecrops, which itself was then made accessible through a secret passageway and may provide some explanations for the Caryatids as a needed element of support and as attendants to the grave. The west cella once hosted a number of shrines to various Greek gods including Poseidon, Butes, Hephaestus and even a place for the chthonic gods. The Erechthion's north porch is the site of the grave of Erechtheus, supposed to have been one of the great kings of Athens. “He is identified with Erichthonius, who is said to be the son of Gaia and Hephaestus (and reared by Athena), and is later associated with Poseidon as well as to Hephaestus … and Butes” (Siegel). Just outside this north entrance, an altar was placed dedicated to the worship of Zeus Thyechoos. The firmness of the Erechtheion as discussed by Vitruvius accommodates its site as well as the important landmarks around it. It is an intricate temple that has historically made it difficult for scholars to interpret had it not been for the presence of identifying art and legend. Created using strong and relatively customizable limestone material, the Erechtheion also once featured a thematic frieze, but the theme of this frieze remains unknown. “The elegance and delicate forms of the Erechtheion contrast sharply with the neighboring Parthenon that counter-balances the architectural complex with its majestic, Doric presence” (Sakoulas). The complex interior of the structure coupled with the complex elevation of the structure and the more flowing, free lines of the Ionic styles provide the building with a great deal of firmness in its structure while also conveying a greater sense of individuality and ideas of the emerging self. The beauty of the building exists in every line of the structure. Covered in art, the building itself once told a story about the gods that were honored there at the same time that a great sensitivity for the selected site was exercised. It also merges art and function in the form of the Caryatids. Both of the porches were given special artistic touches other than the Caryatids, though. According to Siegel, the Ionic columns on the north porch were decorated with a guillache pattern accented by inset colored glass. This porch is home to Poseidon's spring, honored by the presence of a hole in the pavement to provide access to the site and another hole in the roof to give Poseidon access to the place again should he ever find it necessary. There are also suggestions that the portico porch ceilings were once “paneled and painted dark blue with gold stars … and some say that they were inset with panels of variously colored glass” (Siegel). Interior objects discovered during the past century also contribute to the knowledge that this temple was the site of a great deal of meaningful beauty to the people who constructed it. Thus, the Erechtheion is revealed to be a structure that amply meets the three basic elements of architecture in ways that communicated important aspects of the society that built it. Constructed to meet a specific purpose with a very stable and relatively malleable substance, it provided the community with a great deal of beauty and elegance that represented their greatest ideals. The Erechtheion was constructed with the sole purpose to serve as a place of worship for a variety of gods and was constructed during a period of strife and decline. It demonstrates a more adjustable approach in the way the structure works with and around existing sacred sites as well as in its use of the more decorative elements of Ionic columns and the Caryatid sculptures. Thus, the structure provides an example for future generations of architects as to how a building might communicate the ideals of a society while still adhering to the most basic elements of design. Works Cited Calter, Paul. “Ad Quadratum, the Sacred Cut and Roman Architecture.” Dartmouth College. (1998). Web. June 4, 2011. Kruft, Hanno-Walter. “What is Architectural Theory?” A History of Architectural Theory: From Vitruvius to the Present. London: Zwemmer, 1994. 13-19. Print. Roth, Leland M. Understanding Architecture. CT: Westview Press, 1993. Print. Sakoulas, Thomas. “Erechtheion.” Ancient Greece. (2003). Web. June 4, 2011. Siegel, Janice. “Dr. J’s Illustrated Erechtheum Lecture.” Dr. J’s Illustrated Guide to the Classical World. (2005). Web. June 4, 2011. Vasari, Georgio. The Lives of the Artists. New York: Penguin Classics, (1568, reprinted 1998). Print. Read More