No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Greek and Roman Artillery: Technical Treatises
... Sea como fuere, la nueva datación sitúa a la puerta hacia la segunda mitad del siglo I a.C., un momento en el que las máquinas de artillería cuentan ya con una larga tradición (Sáez Abad 2004) y son, especialmente en el caso del mundo romano, herramientas imprescindibles en cualquier operación de asedio (Sáez Abad 2003). Esta relevancia está reflejada en las fuentes históricas, no solo en aquellas que narran innumerables tomas de ciudades, sino también en tratados de poliorcética de autores como Herón, Bitón, Filón de Bizancio o Vitrubio -recogidos y analizados por Marsden (1971)-que han permitido ampliar el conocimiento acerca de la evolución de las características técnicas de las máquinas de artillería. A ello se han de sumar los numerosos hallazgos relacionados con esta Otro importante indicio lo encontramos en el hecho de que el zócalo de las torres sea macizo, lo que para Marsden (1969: 134) es una característica definitoria de las torres de artillería. ...
En el presente artículo se abordan las estructuras que integran el conjunto de acceso oriental del yacimiento ibero-romano de Torreparedones (Baena, Córdoba), una puerta urbana fortificada construida hacia la segunda mitad del siglo I a.C. El estudio arquitectónico de los restos conservados y su interpretación, partiendo de una serie de parale-los peninsulares y mediterráneos, permite comprender el funcionamiento de la puerta y su sistema de control de paso. Se identifica así un acceso de tipo "patio" en el que las torres y, probablemente, las máquinas de artillería jugaron un impor-tante papel en la defensa de la ciudad.
Abstract: This paper analyses the eastern gate structures of the Ibero-Roman site of Torreparedones (Baena, Córdoba), a fortified urban gate built around the second half of the first century b.C. The architectural study of the remains and their interpretation-considering Mediterranean and Peninsu-lar parallels-allows us to understand how this gate system worked. Thus, it can identified as a "courtyard gate", where towers and, possibly, artillery played an important role in the city's defence. Palabras clave: II Edad del Hierro, Romanización, puertas urbanas, arquitectura defensiva iberorromana, artillería 1.
... The Belopoiika (Schöne 1893; Diels and Schramm 1919;Marsden 1971) contains technical specifications for constructing artillery, principally torsion-powered catapults. Philo incorporates empirical techniques he apparently learned from artificers in workshops at Rhodes and Alexandria, some of whom had worked with ). ...
Philo of Byzantium (ca. 200 bce), or Philo Mechanicus, was the author of a multivolume technological compendium on civil and military engineering.
... The Belopoiika (Schöne 1893; Diels and Schramm 1919;Marsden 1971) contains technical specifications for the construction of artillery, principally torsion-powered catapults. Philo incorporates empirical techniques he learned through extensive consultation of artificers in workshops at Rhodes and Alexandria, some of whom had worked with . ...
... (In this context, "torsional motor" indicates a device capable of storing elastic energy by means of torsion.) In the third century B.C., Greek and Roman engineers stated that the diameters of these flanges for throwing machines are as follows [2][3][4][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18]: ...
This study investigated why the design of ancient throwing machines evolved from eutitonon (arms outside the mainframe) to palintonon (arms inside the mainframe) from the end of the first century B.C. to the first century A.D. and evaluated the mechanical advantages of the new design. Palintonon was first used for big machines; in the following centuries, it was also used for much smaller machines. Essentially, the palintonon design has several advantages: more elastic energy can be stored in the hair bundles representing the motors of these machines, heavier projectiles can be thrown with the same charging effort, projectiles are stressed by lower acceleration in the machine with the same muzzle velocity, and the throwing machines have higher efficiency. Results are also presented regarding the "internal ballistics" of these ancient throwing machines by using simulation software.
This book offers the first full-scale, synthetic account of the Latin technical treatises called artes, arguing that their flourishing in the early Roman Empire represents the emergence and development of a uniquely Roman scientific culture. It introduces the Roman artes on architecture, agriculture, land-surveying, medicine, and the art of war to those without specialist knowledge of the disciplines and advances a new argument for their significance vis-à-vis a common intellectual culture. It unpacks the socio-political, literary, and especially philosophical and scientific dimensions of these writings. It characterizes the scientific culture which the artes constitute and traces significant themes in their construction of disciplinary expertise, examining the effects of the tension between theory and practice as well as their systematic, explanatory, and interdisciplinary presentation of specialized knowledge. In presenting a novel interpretation of the artes, this book aims to add a new chapter to the history of science in Greco-Roman antiquity.
Ten years after Muḥammad’s death in 632, Arabic warriors kept together by the new creed he had established had conquered Egypt, Syria (both from the Byzantine Empire), as well as the Sasanid Empire (Iraq and Iran), and before 714 the whole of North Africa and most of the Iberian Peninsula. In 661, power had gone to a family dynasty, the Umayyad, at the cost of a split which left the partisans of Muḥammad’s son-in-law (the Ši‘ah) as an internal opposition. Umayyad power was ended by the Abbāsid revolution in 750, in which the Šīʿites participated without profiting.
Under the Umayyads, conversion to Islām was allowed, but converts became subordinate “clients” to an Arabic tribe. Elite Persian clients had been another driving force in the Abbāsid revolution, and they became the real beneficiaries of the revolution.
The earliest sciences in the Islamic world can be characterized as “Muslim” sciences; they deal with problems of religious importance: first sciences of language, needed for the production of the Qurʾān (Muḥammad’s revelations were at first handed down orally); criticism of the also orally transmitted traditions about Muḥammad’s sayings and decisions; theoretical theology born from the political conflicts. After the Abbāsid revolution, first Sasanid astronomy-cum-astrology (with appurtenant mathematical techniques) and medicine were taken over, but soon the whole range of Greek learning was translated into Arabic, becoming the foundation for further unfolding. These “original” sciences were certainly “Islamic”, woven into the fabric of Islamic society and culture though cultivated also by Jewish and Christian scholars; but they were not “Muslim”.
In particular the “original” sciences created a counterpart of the so-called “Greek miracle”, the discovery of the possibility of theory not meant to serve any practical purpose. This “Islamic miracle” was the stance that no theory is too majestic to be used, and no practice too lowly to be dealt with by theory.
After the Mongol invasions and the dissolution of much of the Islamic world into impoverished statelets, the economic basis for active scientific life and creativity dwindled.
The text selections represent Muslim as well as well as “original” sciences. To the former group belong theoretical theology, historiography and lexicography; to the latter philosophy, medicine, astrology, alchemy, algebra (a newly created mathematical discipline), sociological meta-historiography and commercial science.
This chapter covers “classical Antiquity” in the broad sense, that is, cultures from 650 bce until 550 ce in which prestigious knowledge was formulated in Greek.
Throughout this period, prestigious knowledge was supposed to be “theory” in the original sense of “something seen”, not something to be used (medicine and rhetoric being the noteworthy exceptions). This was connected to social degradation not only of manual work (ideally the chore of slaves) but of anything connected to it; and it was expressed in the creation of philosophy, at first close to inspired wisdom but soon (as definitively established by Aristotle) expressed in reasoned argument not only about what was known but also about the conditions for knowing.
Along with philosophy, specialized branches of knowledge arose B apart from medicine and history only known through surviving texts from Aristotle and the Hellenistic period onward. The Roman conquest of the Hellenistic Empires led to a transfer of political power to the Latin-speaking West, but prestigious knowledge was still formulated in Greek, Latin being nothing but a language of popularization except when Roman history or law were the topics.
A first group of text examples illustrate early natural philosophy and preceding cosmogonic wisdom, together with Hippocratic medicine and history. Aristotle is presented both by texts which also in modern terms deal with philosophy and by texts dealing with particular disciplines (political history, natural history, etc.). Hellenistic and post-Hellenistic special sciences are represented by astronomy, astrology, medicine, mathematics (both mathematics itself and texts discussing mathematics “from the outside”) and grammar. A few texts, finally, exemplify the Latin popularization of Greek knowledge.
Charles and Singleton have explained why Cassius Dio's claim (60.21.2) that elephants were among the equipment prepared for use in Britain during the Claudian invasion of a.d . 43 is probably untrue, if one assumes that by ‘elephant’ he means the animal of that name. It is argued here that the best explanation of this apparent error is that Dio preserves a reference to a type of military machine, probably a siege-tower, rather than to the animal of this name.
This innovative and wide-ranging volume is the first systematic exploration of the multifaceted relationship between human bodies and machines in classical antiquity. It examines the conception of the body and bodily processes in mechanical terms in ancient medical writings, and looks into how artificial bodies and automata were equally configured in human terms; it also investigates how this knowledge applied to the treatment of the disabled and the diseased in the ancient world. The volume examines the pre-history of what develops, at a later stage, and more specifically during the early modern period, into the full science of iatromechanics in the context of which the human body was treated as a machine and medical treatments were devised accordingly. The volume facilitates future dialogue between scholars working on different areas, from classics, history and archaeology to history of science, philosophy and technology.
This innovative and wide-ranging volume is the first systematic exploration of the multifaceted relationship between human bodies and machines in classical antiquity. It examines the conception of the body and bodily processes in mechanical terms in ancient medical writings, and looks into how artificial bodies and automata were equally configured in human terms; it also investigates how this knowledge applied to the treatment of the disabled and the diseased in the ancient world. The volume examines the pre-history of what develops, at a later stage, and more specifically during the early modern period, into the full science of iatromechanics in the context of which the human body was treated as a machine and medical treatments were devised accordingly. The volume facilitates future dialogue between scholars working on different areas, from classics, history and archaeology to history of science, philosophy and technology.
Hero of Alexandria was a figure of great importance not only for ancient technology but also for the medieval and early modern traditions that drew on his work. In this book Courtney Roby presents Hero's key strategies for developing, solving, and contextualizing technical problems, not only in his own lifetime but as an influential tradition of creating accessible technical treatises spanning multiple disciplines. While Hero's historical biography is all but impossible to reconstruct, she examines “Hero” as a corpus, a textual tradition of technical problem-solving capable of incorporating textual transformations like interpolation, epitomization, and translation, as well as intermedial transformation from text to artifact. Key themes include ancient and early modern technical readerships, the relationship between mathematics and mechanics, the materiality of manuscript and printed texts, and the shifting cultural contexts for scientific and technical literature.
The Early Roman military artifacts at Khirbet el-Maqatir suggest a Roman attack at the site, apparently part of Vespasian's campaign in the hill country north of Jerusalem in A.D. 69, as well as a continued Roman garrison occupying the site for some time afterward. The finds include hobnails, slingstones and ballista balls, sling pellets, arrowheads, javelin heads, blades, and equestrian fittings. Though most of these artifacts came from Early Roman contexts (Stratum 3b), the dating of the whole collection may extend from the Late Hellenistic period to the mid-third century CE. Overall, the Early Roman militaria found at Khirbet el-Maqatir seems to support the excavators' assertion that the Late Hellenistic and Early Roman settlement was founded in the second century BCE, destroyed by the Romans in 69 CE, and subsequently occupied by Roman soldiers until sometime before the Second Jewish Revolt (132-135 CE) when a Jewish population resettled the site.
The article is the first Russian translation of a short treatise “Epitedeuma” by Urbicius, a Greek author. In this treatise, in a rhetorical form, Urbicius recommends to the Eastern Roman Emperor Anastasius (AD 491—518) to use special military devices, conventionally called “Spanish rider”, to protect the Roman infantry formation. The devices had to neutralize the horses of enemy cavalrymen and thereby disable the enemy’s powerful cavalry. This translation is supplied with an introductory article and comments explaining the historical realities.
Hero of Alexandria, who probably dates to the first or second century CE, produced treatises on a wide range of scientific and technical topics: geometry, surveying, catapult design, elaborate pneumatic devices, and more. The term theōria and its cognates appear throughout Hero’s works to reflect a set of disciplined observational activities that interrogate the links between text and artifact, the boundaries between nature and the artificial structures (including texts) that mediate our experience of it, and the limits of our ability to observe and describe the world around us. The objects observed include natural phenomena and artificial devices, as well as the diagrams in Hero’s own texts and the logical structures that underlie the systematic frameworks of his books. This paper will examine the interplay in Hero’s Dioptra, Belopoeica, and Pneumatica between “diagrammatic” and “theoretical” ways of subjecting technological artifacts to forms of visual discipline. Though Hero’s theōria certainly embraces a wide range of ways of seeing, they cluster semantically around their ability to link domains—the abstract and the concrete, the mathematical and the material, objects in the world and diagrams in the text—while preserving the truth value of observations as they move between domains.KeywordsGreco-Roman scienceMechanicsDiagramsThought experimentsProof
Heron of Alexandria, mathematician, physicist , and engineer of Greek origin, was considered the greatest experimenter of antiquity and the leading figure of the Roman and Hellenistic scientific tradition. He taught at Alexandria's Musaeum and he wrote several treatises on Mathematics, Geometry, and Engineering. Most of his books have been lost, but fortunately some of them were preserved mainly in Arabic manuscripts. Among his outstanding inventions, one could mention the Aeolipile, the first steam turbine, automated machines for temples and theatres, surveying instruments, and military machines and weapons.
Aristotle has traditionally been cast as the arch-enemy of all things mechanistic. Given the dichotomy long thought to exist between mechanistic and teleological schools of thought, there is a satisfying irony in discovering veins of apparently ‘mechanistic’ thought within the work of the definitive teleologist. Several waves of scholarship in the past century have argued, from different angles, for mechanistic interpretations of Aristotle’s natural philosophy. The present generation is no exception: in the last decade, Jean De Groot, Monte Johnson, and Tiberiu Popa have variously argued that a mechanistic vein can be found in Aristotle’s work, despite his undeniable teleological credentials. This paper explores the assumptions—some of them open to question—that accompany such advocacy. It will urge some terminological refinements, and turn a skeptical lens on some aspects of these projects. Nonetheless, it will stress that they open promising lines of inquiry, avoiding some of the limitations of earlier ventures into this territory.
Biton’s Construction of Machines of War and Catapults describes six machines by five engineers or inventors; the fourth machine is a rolling elevatable scaling ladder, named sambukē, designed by one Damis of Kolophōn. The first sambukē was invented by Herakleides of Taras, in 214 BCE, for the Roman siege of Syracuse. Biton is often dismissed as incomprehensible or preposterous. I here argue that the account of Damis’ device is largely coherent and shows that Biton understood that Damis had built a machine that embodied Archimedean principles. The machine embodies three such principles: (1) the proportionate balancing of the torques on a lever (from Plane Equilibria, an early work); (2) the concept of specific gravity or density (from Floating Bodies, a late work); and (3) the κοχλίας, i.e., a worm drive (invented ca 240 BCE), with the toothed wheel functioning as the horizontal axis of rotation of the elevated ladder. Moreover, the stone-thrower of Isidoros of Abydos (the second machine in Biton) also embodies the κοχλίας.
I present a systematic interpretation of the foundational purpose of constructions in ancient Greek geometry. I argue that Greek geometers were committed to an operationalist foundational program, according to which all of mathematics—including its entire ontology and epistemology—is based entirely on concrete physical constructions. On this reading, key foundational aspects of Greek geometry are analogous to core tenets of 20th-century operationalist/positivist/constructivist/intuitionist philosophy of science and mathematics. Operationalism provides coherent answers to a range of traditional philosophical problems regarding classical mathematics, such as the epistemic warrant and generality of diagrammatic reasoning, superposition, and the relation between constructivism and proof by contradiction. Alleged logical flaws in Euclid (implicit diagrammatic reasoning, superposition) can be interpreted as sound operationalist reasoning. Operationalism also provides a compelling philosophical motivation for the otherwise inexplicable Greek obsession with cube duplication, angle trisection, and circle quadrature. Operationalism makes coherent sense of numerous specific choices made in this tradition, and suggests new interpretations of several solutions to these problems. In particular, I argue that: Archytas’s cube duplication was originally a single-motion machine; Diocles’s cissoid was originally traced by a linkage device; Greek conic section theory was thoroughly constructive, based on the conic compass; in a few cases, string-based constructions of conic sections were used instead; pointwise constructions of curves were rejected in foundational contexts by Greek mathematicians, with good reason. Operationalism enables us to view the classical geometrical tradition as a more unified and philosophically aware enterprise than has hitherto been recognised.
Las excavaciones que se vienen desarrollando en la ciudad de Libisosa (Lezuza, Albacete) han proporcionado-y siguen haciéndolo-un gran número de armas datables sobre todo en dos fases concretas: el periodo de estabilización de la conquista romana en el tercer cuarto del s. II a. C. y el periodo sertoriano, hacia el año 75 a. C. Este conjunto es muy notable por su número, la buena calidad de conservación, la variedad tipológica (ofensivas y defensivas de diversos tipos, arreos de caballo), y su preciso contexto arqueológico urbano. Para el periodo que conocemos como "baja época ibérica", que desde la otra perspectiva corresponde al periodo romano republicano en Hispania, el lote de armas de Lezuza es uno de los más completos e importantes de la península ibérica, por su relevancia y calidad al nivel de los de Numancia, Caminreal u Osuna.
___________________________
Current archaeological excavations at the ancient city of Libisosa (Lezuza, Albacete, SouthEastern Spain) have yielded-and still do-a large number of weapons. These belong mostly to two different periods: the period of the stabilization of the Roman Conquest in the third quarter of the second century BC and the Sertorian Wars (c. 75 BC). This assemblage is most relevant due to its size, good state of preservation, typological variety (a good sample of offensive and defensive weapons and horse tack), and its precise, urban archaeological context. For this period, both "Late Iron Age Iberian" or "Republican Roman" according to perspective, the weapons from Libisosa are one of the most important assemblages in the Peninsula, in a level with those from Numantia, Caminreal or Osuna.
Vitruvius mentions that military engineers used models to test their designs for war machines, and there is evidence that models were used in the middle ages in the design and construction of many cathedrals; but none of these models remain. Models were often used in the 17th and 18th centuries in the design of large timber roofs (e.g. Elias Holl in Augsburg), hydraulic machinery (e.g. Elias Holl and Caspar Walter in Augsburg) and timber bridges (e.g. Caspar Walter and the Grubenmann brothers in Switzerland). Perhaps the earliest modern scientific use of models was by John Smeaton in the 1750s for the design of windmills and water wheels.
Cambridge Core - Ancient History - The Cambridge Ancient History - edited by Alan K. Bowman
The aim of this paper is to discuss the modern value of the automata designs by Heron and to stress the power of Antiquity mechanical design of mechanisms in dealing not only with operation tasks. In addition, an interpretation is proposed to understand those automata as early robots for a proper inspiration of new solutions as technological transfer of accumulated theoretical knowledge and for credit as systems of cultural contents. The paper shows main designs supporting the above arguments and a specific interpretation on how Heron merged successfully automation technology with cultural values.
In the present chapter, a historical study and technological analysis of some mechanisms or mechanical devices of the Middle Ages, around 1100 year, will be carried out. In that time, it was very usual to see devices working moved by water, in most cases by animal power, made of affordable materials such as wood and built by hand. The 26 and 30 mechanisms of “The Book of Secrets”, a manuscript written by the Andalusian engineer named Ibn Khalaf al-Muradi, will be specifically analyzed. They show a mechanism to raise water from a well by means of a bucket in a repetitive way, operated by animal power and a water clock. A description of the components of the mechanisms, their operation and their most significant characteristics will be made. Next, a virtual reconstruction of the mechanisms will be presented, using geometrical modeling software such as Catia V5, which facilitates the virtual reconstruction of these devices. Finally, a virtual animation can be generated to appreciate the operation mode, as well as to carry out mechanical analysis.
As conflict archaeology has matured as a discipline, there have been calls for more unified analytical techniques. Several researchers advocate the adoption of codified analytical and planning concepts used by the United States Army. One of these concepts, KOCOA Terrain Analysis, shows promise as a locational and analytical aid in archaeological contexts. Defining terrain features are identified and categorized according to well-defined terminology, allowing for a detailed analysis of the effects of terrain on military operations. KOCOA’s structure and codification render the concept transferable between researchers and diachronically across different site types. KOCOA has only rarely been utilized outside the United States and only on historical battlefields. The ongoing archaeological research at the Monte Bernorio oppidum (Palencia, Spain) provides an opportunity to utilize KOCOA in a classical, proto-historical archaeological context.
Beneath the waters of Aboukir Bay at the edge of Egypt’s
north-western Nile Delta
, lies a vast submerged landscape. Here in this marshy and lagoonal area a major port developed in the early first millennium BC at the end of the Canopic branch of the Nile.
Siege warfare in antiquity was bloodier than other forms of combat, usually involving urban centers rather than purely military installations. Though sieges, in contrast to open battles, required complicated logistics and employed high technology, there was remarkably little development of fundamental designs. The two significant advances were the invention of torsion artillery around 400 bc and the introduction of traction artillery in the sixth century ad. The besieger could attempt one of three ways to get into a town: under the walls (by mining), over the walls (by scaling), or through the walls (by rams, artillery, or subterfuge). A complex variety of motives encouraged men to run the enormous risks involved in being first through the breach or over the wall; once in the town itself, they faced the bloody prospect of house-to-house combat. Following a successful assault, the mental and physical strains imposed on the besiegers often led to savage reprisals. Other sieges, however, ended not with storm and sack but with the capitulation of the starving defenders. Sieges upset societal norms; exceptionally in the ancient world, women might be found taking an active part in combat. As urban centers were often religious centers, it is unsurprising that the gods often feature prominently in literary accounts. High literature not only responded to the excitement and heroism of sieges but also could actively shape the ways in which sieges were prosecuted.
Armed forces in the ancient world evolved through various reorganizations which were designed to lead to greater levels of efficiency. Various Greek states, the Macedonians, and finally Rome proved successful because of their ability to muster and marshal personnel into coordinated military units with defined command structures. Over time, they also mastered logistics, came to utilize command and control strategies, and introduced standardized training. Such structures allowed these states to project their power over long distances and eventually to establish either mega-states or lasting empires. Nevertheless, no ancient imperial state truly embraced technology and scientific innovation, and thus none were able to bring about the weaponry necessary to create a truly lasting advantage over their more numerous foes.
One of the first projectile weapons was the sling; there is evidence of slings dating from about 10,000 BCE. The sling is a very basic weapon, consisting of a piece of cloth or hide to which two unequal strings are attached. A small shot is placed in the sling, which is then whirled about the head and one of the strings released in the direction of the target. An important innovation occurred at about 6,000 BCE, when it was found that conical shot was more accurate than round shot, and the first manufactured ammunition was made from baked clay from 5,000 BCE. The sling was a dangerous weapon; Alexander himself was only saved from death by his helmet when hit on the head by a slingshot during the siege of Kyropolis in 329 BCE. The bow and arrow is even older than the sling, with cave paintings of bows dating back to the Palaeolithic (Rihill 2007: 13). Composite bows, made of wood, sinew and horn, smaller and more powerful than the ‘self-bow’ constructed from a single piece of wood, appeared in the fourth millennium BCE. I resist the temptation to date the beginnings of weapons research with reference to any of these innovations regarding the bow or the sling – I expect some case could be made if only the evidence was available, but the precise date at which weapons research began is not something that needs to be established here. However, when the sling and bow evolved into the catapult, and especially with the advent of torsion artillery, it is clear that weapons research had arrived. In this chapter I will say something about catapult technology in order to show that weapons research has been around for a long time. The development of this technology will also help us understand just what weapons research is. Moreover, there are four remarkable treatises on the catapult written between the third century BCE and the first century CE by Philon, Biton, Heron and Vitruvius which amount to the first weapons design manuals. To conclude, I will outline the evolution view of technology, and illustrate it with reference to the catapult. To set the scene I recount one of the best-known episodes in the ancient world of military technology skilfully deployed to thwart a powerful enemy.
From the beginning of human history, settlements were linked with the problems of defense and survival. With the advent of civilization, fortified cities and citadels were erected, and war, conquest, and expansion became usual ways of the daily life of ancient peoples. Fortifications and siegeworks were always inextricably combined, and the development of one inevitably stimulates changes in the other. Here we survey the parallel evolution of Greek and Roman fortifications and siegeworks, often interconnected, from rudimentary to elaborate and tremendously complex systems. We focus on the analysis of various systems of fortifications, siege techniques and Greco-Roman siege weapons, from the Bronze Age to the late Western Roman Empire.
Some examples indicating the surprising level of the technical and scientific knowledge of the Hellenistic scientists and engineers are presented. The latter concern the measuring of the time, the self-propelled carts, the throwing machines and the automatic devices. Some of them, in fact, already contain the concept of automation. A brief reference is also made to the steam cannon.
The optical measures have often been explained within the conceptual framework provided by Vitruvius: the "true" symmetries are distorted by space. Hence they have to be corrected by optical measures under the "real" conditions of appearance. While scholars have studied the phenomenon of optical measures within a narrowly mathematical framework, the aesthetic implications of Vitruvius' claim, his ambiguous use of the "truth" and "reality" has hardly been noticed. By situating the phenomenon of architectural proportions within the broader aesthetic discourse on Hellenistic art, this paper shall reveal the paradox of discourse between the optical knowledge and professional power of the architect. Rather than being a means to a quintessential truth or reality, the paper shall demonstrate how indeed optical measures were employed as a means to stylistic ends; that the change in the proportions of temple architecture from the Classical to the Hellenistic age predicates a painterly taste.
The royal Hellenistic armies, heirs of Alexander the Great's army and of the Macedonian traditions and institutions, constituted the most solid foundation for the power of the kings, warrior chiefs who had responsibility for military strategy and the selection of the trained personnel.Keywords:classical civilization;Greek history;military history
The Doric temple is one of the ancient Greeks' most celebrated achievements and one of the great archetypes of architectural history. Not only was it the ultimate reference for other typologies (propylaea, stoas, and miscellaneous civic buildings), it was also, especially in its fifth-century form, a highly influential source for the later practice of classical architecture. Yet the methods used to design the ancient Doric temple remain a largely unresolved question despite the considerable scholarly effort dedicated to its investigation. This lack of resolution reflects to some extent lapses of regularity and symmetry in Doric temple plans, lapses that Vitruvius called "the faults and incongruities" that flowed from the notorious problem associated with the configuration of the peristyle and its frieze at the corner. This problem was also compounded in the archaic period by the prevailing reliance on rules of thumb and a successive approach toward making individual decisions. But by the second quarter of the fifth century, architects had acquired a greater control over the design process, becoming able to instill their projects with improved coherence and precision, as well as neater proportions. The most striking manifestation of this shift is the widespread adoption of a 2:3 ratio between the widths of triglyphs and metopes, a relationship that automatically generated column spacings equivalent to 5 triglyph widths. This analysis of the facades of 10 relatively well preserved hexastyle temples shows that the triglyph width was much more than just one consideration out of many; it constituted the very lynchpin of a fully-fledged modular design method. Such an interpretation helps to explain the consistency of temple facades while also, significantly, tallying with the evidence of Vitruvius, our sole ancient authority. Vitruvius described Doric design in modular terms, and he also chose a module equal to the triglyph width. In the past, scholars have tended either to trace Vitruvius's account only as far back as the Hellenistic period, or alternatively to doubt its legitimacy altogether. It now emerges that Vitruvius perpetuated principles and practices that went well back into the fifth century.
Relevant contributions are ascribed to Archimedes as related to early developments in mechanics with application to mechanism design with a modern vision. Archimedes developed theoretical advances that were motivated by and applied to practical problems with an enthusiastic behaviour and with a modern spirit that can be summarized in his motto ‘Give me a place to stand and I will move the earth’. In this paper his contribution to mechanics is discussed as related to his results in designing and successfully operating mechanisms.
The question whether there exists an interaction between ‘science’ (foreign text ignored) and ‘technology’ (foreign text ignored, esp. foreign text ignored) in Greek and Roman antiquity is discussed controversially until today. Especially representatives of the philologies strictly deny any form of relation, whereas modern scientists tend to take for granted that the current interaction between (exact) natural sciences and technology has always existed, at least since the beginning of real natural science founded by the ancient Greeks.
This paper shows that both parties are right — at least in a certain way. Following current terminology and contents of ‘science’ and ‘technology’ there had been such an interaction — particularly with mathematics as linking element in so far as in antiquity especially foreign text ignored (mechanics) was regarded as applied mathematics and not as science. The strong interaction between pure mathematics and such fields of applied mathematics (namely mechanical technology) based on the fact that technological (mechanical) artefacts were properly constructed mathematically. Some of them are mentioned in this paper (astrolabes and sundials, waterclocks, tools and machines — especially lifting gears, bucket elevators, guns, pneumatic tools —, architecture of temples); in so far the supporters of an interaction between science and technology are right. However, the post‐Aristotelian Greeks and Romans did not consider mathematics to be part of ‘science (of nature)’ as the post‐kantian exact scientists do. Mathematics to them was a mere ‘art’ — consequently, in the mentioned cases there had been an interaction between ‘arts’ and of course not between ‘science’ and ‘art’ (technology); and in so far those are right who deny an interaction between natural science and technology.
This shows that the contrariety of the answers to the question depends on the different terminology chosen. Following the current understanding of ‘exact natural science’ the answer is: yes; following the conception of ‘science’ in the self‐understanding of Greek and Roman antiquity the answer is: no — and this is right as well! The reason for this apparent contrariety are just the different meanings and contents of ‘science (of nature)’ in antiquity and modern times.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.