Philosophy of Architecture and Architecture as Philosophy ... · Philosophy of Architecture and Architecture as Philosophy: The Potentialities in Accordance to Critical Sermon ...

International Journal of Architecture, Engineering and ConstructionVol 5, No 2, June 2016, 83-97

Philosophy of Architecture and Architecture as Philosophy:The Potentialities in Accordance to Critical Sermon

Sayed Ahmed∗

Department of Architecture, Bangladesh University, 15/1 Asad Avenue, Dhaka-1207, Bangladesh

Abstract: The consequential philosophical yearning and classical architecture had acquired an exceptionalsignificance during the culmination of ancient Greek world despite all the conflicts and crisis; which are stillcontextual. In this interdisciplinary study, an estimated “theory” and “hypothesizing” took the major motivatingtributary to descend a relation between the modalities of classical philosophy and theory of aesthetics associatedwith ancient Greek architecture. Thus discourses from philosophy, humanities and artistic theories regarding Greekarchitectural features are brought within reach. For that, visual, material, construction and stylistic analysis ofGreek architecture have constructed the “What and How” while the iconographic discussions will lead us to theanswers of “Why”. Some supportive analyses of socio-political history, text and biographies are also deliberated tocorrelate and prove the evidences. Who knows, architecture might be the memento of Greek metaphysicalmanifestation; where the then Greek religion, power and patronization, economy, cultural exchange, humanethought and overall, their philosophy translated into hoary stones- something which is still a mystery. Suchhypotheses will distillate that how influential were these deep-sighted thoughts and made them able to constituentall these white carving-stone poetry. The philosophical responsiveness might have sprouted from the immanentinterrogations in architecture through form function and space, as a speculation of external and transcendentalquestions to search the “Ideal”. The possible coherence of architecture with philosophy without any distinct horizonin-between, which is less focused earlier, designates the originality of this discourse.

Keywords: Greek philosophy, greek architecture, geometry and mathematics, classical orders and techniques,scale and proportion and universal appeal

DOI: 10.7492/IJAEC.2016.009

1 INTRODUCTION

Origins of Greek philosophy have two conventionaltiers: The first tier includes pre-Socratic rationalizedexplanation which often depicted in prose instead ofmythopoeic discourse of the epics. The second tiercontains epistemological and ontological issues discussedby Plato, Aristotle and selected previous scholars whosework relates with them (Halim 2010). This secondphrase is important for this study’s literature review.For the overall view, philosophers; who ignited the lovefor knowledge; starting from Thales and followed bySocrates, Plato and Aristotle, turned ethical mattersaway from physical reality. To formulate the discussionof this study we stay upon the philosophy developed byphilosophers like Anaximander, Pythagoras, Plato andAristotle. Influenced by Pythagorean thought, Platobelieved the truths of poetry and all sciences were derivedfrom “One” as he believed “all form of art, and soulspeaks to soul” (Nabi and Alam 2009). Implicitly, Platohas given a model of a new art form to next posteritythat meticulously observed by Nietzsche at the “Birth ofTragedy” published in 1885 (Lacoue-Labarthe 1993). In

fact, Plato’s idea was the translation of what Pythagorasmeant by the “number” and his taste, preferences anddevotion to geometry have influenced many generationsof philosophers by his Dialog (36 are known yet). Forexample, in Aristotle’s theory of abstraction or in morelatter period when Spinoza (1632-77AD) proclaims “Godand the universal laws of structure and operation allare one and the same reality” to introduce the Platonicthought in a new dimension, “God always geometrizes”(Bari 1995).

The zenith of the Athenian art and architecturetakes place between 400 and 300 BC; meanwhile, theirphilosophy was well established. During the 8th andthe beginning of the 7th century BC, archaic artstarted to change into classical objects to overcomethe Egyptian influence. Simultaneously, prominentGreek architects were also not an aloof group of theirtriumph of philosophy. Architecture was thoroughlygrounded in culture and philosophy of their creators,representing their regions and time (Miller 1997). Asarchitecture was always guided by religion and withoutphilosophy, religion cannot exist (Rahman 2011); and

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

83

http://dx.doi.org/10.7492/IJAEC.2016.009

mailto:[email protected]

Ahmed/International Journal of Architecture, Engineering and Construction 5 (2016) 83-97

without architecture, religion cannot flourish. Thusrational discourse was introduced and promoted to takearchitectural decisions in these Monumental temples,as architecture is not only the technology but alsoattendant to sociopolitical questions and the source oftheir excellence. This study suggests, such rational;aesthetic and moral interests can hardly be separated inGreek architectural thought. What was the uniqueness inthe Greek architectural creation? Did the philosophicaladvent worked as touchstone behind Greek architecture?Was it the philosophy to form a stylistic distinction intheir architecture?

2 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

Ancient Greek architecture focuses on some specificdesign aspects from Greek philosophy. Depending onobjectives, the result of philosophical studies can includesome suggestions that how such sort of design sense waspossible to evolve from stone which is still contextual andperfect. The main objective of the paper is to highlightthe contribution of great thinkers of that era and itsreflection over architecture:

1. To explore the pattern of the architectural practicein ancient Greece according to enlightens ofknowledge;

2. To find the possible effect over spatial configurationespecially on religious and cultural functionsaccording to their thoughts;

3. To discuss how difficult it is to establish a linkbetween philosophy and architecture in these casestudies;

4. To explore a hypothetical concept in a diversifiedmorality.

3 SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS OF THESTUDY

3.1 Scope of the Study

The study would present the hypothetical scenarioof architectural practice and perseverance in Greekislands. The effect of spatial configuration accordingto philosophical thinking has also been imagined.Extensive study can be done based on this studywhich can eventually guide to generate some thesis ofinterdisciplinary exchange and to indicate the prerequisiteof universal knowledge which is really possible. For myresearch, Ground level study was only window to peepthrough.

3.2 Limitations of the Study

Although field methods can be extremely useful and thusarchaeology always provides epoch making decisions asthey are conducted in the specific environment, was themajor limitation to consider regarding this study. Otherlimitations include: Lack of reliable resources, Muchlonger study periods and therefore requires much goodwill

and finally, studies are longitudinal in nature; therefore,grinding down became a problem.The only one option for this study was the literature

review, which one was not blinded, and there wasno comparison made between the data collected fromdifferent sources. However, these limitations mightnot prevent me from drawing any definite conclusionregarding this study. It can speculate that the history lefta little window from where I have to assume my desiredderivations with meticulous observation.

4 METHODOLOGY

This study is emphasized on the synthesis of philosophicaltexts and architectural languages within the arenaof Common issues of ancient Greek practice, socialand cultural aspects which shaped the Greek identity.Besides, as the study is history based, literature reviewwas thus used as the prior tool. The research is based ontwo broad approaches:

1. To establish a Theoretical framework for analysis(based on literature review);

2. Deriving hypothetical results from Empirical basis(based on analysis and critics).

The investigation of the particular research consist thefollowing steps outlined in Figure 1:

Figure 1. The research design of the study

5 LITERATURE REVIEW

5.1 Sociopolitical Impacts for Architecture

Nowadays, a new third tier is developing, whichinvestigates what exactly in Greek culture caused theirthinkers to begin rationalized thoughts in prose, alongwith complex sociopolitical context by questioning whysuch temples were built and who paid for the architects?It has not been acknowledged and studied as an importantfactor to trace the origin of ancient Greek philosophy andalso their art. Evidence from the works of Herodotusshowed that the wealthy and powerful patrons likeboth Polyaino and Plutarch, financed the building anddesigning of the temples in an effort to solidify theireroding prestige. Again, according to Plato, philosophypredominantly means two possessions: To rule wisely(politics) and to think clearly, (metaphysics) whichshaped the Greek artistic worth also and our concernfor this discourse. From the political and socio-culturalpoint of view, we can say; Athens was proud of itscultural identity and believed them only civilized among

84


barbarians. Thus political achievements were bound tobe the best, which the world had never seen: Democracy.Unlike Egyptians, slave labor or any religious dogma wasnot foremost drive for Greeks. From history, we knowthat Failure of maintaining this virtue brought the failureof Greece.In a period of mere 100 years, the progress of

Athens was absolutely astonishing, especially taking intoconsideration that the time and pains to hinder thePersian invasion and civil struggles amongst the Greekcity states (Graves 1960). In history books, we knowhow the Roman Empire captured Greece but it was trulythe Greek culture, which conquered their conquerors.Roman art and their independent creative genius havenever reached the highs of the classic Greek art. Infact, the decline of the Roman Empire is reflected in thedecline of its art (Hoff 2005). Greek democracy proved tobe more efficient sociopolitical base for art practice thanimperialist Rome. Greek achievement was never repeatedin human history, might be equivalent in some extendwith the cultural flight of Florentine renaissance, 1700years later.

5.2 Iconographic Aspects

During the transformation from Archaic to Classical,new artifacts of Greek architecture reflected both theintellectual knowledge and their passion for modestgeometry. They explained the vitality of nature bytheir own formulas (Read 1968). The Greek artisanshad perfect knowledge of human anatomy and viewedthemselves as vital link between heaven and art (Faulkneret al. 1986). This interplay of ideology and art onthe development of the Greek thought made their artas greatest of all products, from painting, sculpture,and architecture to the elaborately planned cities likeMiletus; all were the reason made manifest; geometryover marble to stimulate all successors of the westernarchitectural history as a common Phenomenon (Durant1939). The clear, transparent and simple structure ofEuclidian geometry is often described as being closedor finite which shows the same love for designing theplain, simple and ordered forms of Greek temples anddominant in their facade as lucidity was the constituentfor its beauty. Human mind and eyes soon grasp andencompass its proportions and grandeur: they are best byevery means. In fact, his golden rectangle concept (knownas Phi) served as a canon for architectural façade designs(Kline 1964). If the Roman “bricks” are more like fastproduction, the Greek “stones” are slow art of devotion.And Renaissance was nothing but the revival of Greekthoughts by every means of the western society. It couldbe their mythical believes and humane intellectualitywhich resulted in a distinct icon for architecture. TheGreeks appear to be excellent scholars of visual illusion,an attribute undoubtedly sharpened by the years ofrefinement and observation of the natural world to moldtheir architecture. Here the artistic aptness is augmentedby the surrounding area (hills) and dominates the terrain.Greek temple is visible from all views which demonstrate

the main difference from any Roman temple, whichalways emphasized front elevation.

5.3 Stylistic Features in the Textual Scrutiny

Greek architecture reaches to highest aesthetic perfectionat the temple complex of Acropolis where finestarchitecture like Parthenon, Propylaea, Erechtheum andthe Theseum were reserved. As most astonishing style,Greek architectural features remained practiced all overEurope. The basic idea later emphasized on Euclidianconcept of theoretical geometry and applied successfullyby Roman architect like Vitruvius in his book “DeArchitectura Libri Decem” (1st century AD) and alsoby Dutch architect Villard de Honnecourt at his book“Livre de Portraiture” (between 1220 to 1230 AD), bothconsidered as influential sequence of the classical tradition(Williams and Duvernoy 2014). However, Honnecourtwas more implemented in medieval architecture. ButFor classical temple architecture, Vitruvius is one andonly reference that we could get. In his Book number3, shortly before 27 BC; he discussed temple designingwhich begun with an essay on “symmetry” and describedthe proportioning systems. He adopted the Protagoras’sstatement, proportions of human body are fundamentalto achieve the architectural satisfaction which had somereligious significance also. Human body is ought to beperfect as it is made in God’s image, thus temples shouldfollow human dimensions (Wittkower 1971). He suggestshow the circle and the square are perfect shapes togenerate architectural designs because they approximatethe geometry of the spread-eagled human body (Ostwald2000). Besides, the comfort of scale originates from this“spherical bubble” which is roughly related to the humanaxis. That’s why the one directional ceiling height ofGreek temple reflects an established character of rigidlysimple and symmetric spaces inside it (Alexander et al.1977).

There was a little progress in mathematics ofarchitecture during the dark ages until the next person;Brunelleschi comes in the scenario, during the 14th and15th centuries. Visiting Rome, he made extraordinarydrawings from the ruins of many great ancient buildings,baths, basilicas, amphitheaters and temples. Bystudying the rules of proportion and symmetry; alsothe construction methods of architectural elements suchas vaults and cupolas, he revealed a truth - the linearperspective: a critical method applicable for special dataof architecture by reasoning. Here the Platonic influencepredominates over Aristotelianism as it leads theoreticallyto a single point (Argan and Robb 1946). His discoverywas to explain the visual effect which is likely to ensurevisibility from all positions of any observer (Shuttleworth2015). Features of Greek architecture and use of geometryand proportion was the cherished goal for the masons ofmedieval era against religious dogma.

85


5.4 Construction Techniques and MaterialSelection

The raw materials and the technologies available todevelop and utilize them had largely determined thenature of their architecture amidst all adversity andlimitation. For example, Columns were constructed bythe carved drums of local stone, usually limestone ortufa. Marble from the Cycladic land of Paros was usedpredominantly, which is decorated with Pentelic marble.But two techniques were found in the philosophical prosesof Anaximander, discussed below.

Figure 2. Anathyrosis is the joining element on a stonefrom its below and above

The technique of Anathyrosis (Figure 2) was inventedby the first builders of monumental stone masonry inGreece in the 7th century B.C in Temple of Poseidonby Isthmians (680-650 BC). It is the technical term toindicate that “how to dress the joints of stone blocks”.The word describes itself the visual appearance of anyjoint which resembles the trim of a door. Thyra is a Greekword for “door” thus Anathyrosis refers to “door framing”.Usually found only on vertical joint surfaces, Anathyrosiswas also used on the horizontal joints of column drums(O’Connor and Robertson 2002). The joint had tobe exact since stone blocks were set directly againsteach other without the use of mortar (invented later byRomans). In order to reduce the amount of constructiontime, the joining face of the stone was finished andsmoothed only in a narrow contact band on the sidesand top, while the interior of the face was recessed.The contact band looks somewhat like a doorframe andthe term is allusive also. This technique was frequentlyemployed in ashlar (basic module) construction (Chinget al. 2007) and might be used between the drums ofcolumns as well. Today, we can reveal its place within astructure in two ways: where this technique was appliedto a stone or whether other stones were joined to it ornot.On the other hand, Empolion (Figure 3) is a technique

where wooden block placed at the center of a columndrum joint, into which the round wooden centering pinor peg was used in order to align the drums. To constructthe column-drums to form a single column; sometimes itwas also made in bronze. As the column shafts werecomprise of a series of cylindrical drums while squarehole appears at the center of the top and bottom ofeach drum. The matching holes on adjoining drums wereto fix with it. These techniques were mainly to tightfit the stones to hold in the place without mortar; areinforcement treatment against earthquake (Camp andDinsmoor 1984).

Figure 3. An Empolion to ensure the correct centeringof column drum

5.5 Biographic and Textual Analysis ofRelevant Greek Philosophers

Greeks believed in three worlds: external, internal andsole. Philosophers searched for the third, sole. Five thingsare important to ask all their philosophical questions:creation of universe, creation of world, creation of human,creation of civilization and creation of culture. Theytried to give a fundamental meaning of all creations.Continuous question and prediction with prudence leadthem to direct the ultimate goal to solve the problemsof creation. Their cosmic idea helped architects to erecttheir temples indeed. Let’s start the biography discussionchronologically:

Anaximander, (610 - 546 BC) (to a lesser extent,Thales) the author of the first philosophical text in prose,believed that Earth’s shape is like a cylinder with a one-third height to its diameter. In astronomy, he triedto describe the mechanics of celestial bodies relating tothe Earth that is lying in the center of the universeand floats on unsupported mechanical model of thesky. His cosmic order is not monarchic rather geometricwhich reflects the equilibrium of the earth (Mosse 1984).However, to visualize his dormant model, he dependedon the architectural treatises of unique fixing practiceslike Anathyrosis and Emplion to imagine the position

86


Figure 4. The Allegory of the Cave (Courtesy of Michael John M. Tamayao)

of the Earth like a column-drum, so that it would notdrift laterally or vertically, later discussed briefly in thisstudy. In his Syngraphe, (a prose description in wordsand numbers written at the outset of a project) he usedaerial views (i.e., plan view or horizontal cross section)to manifest a logical analogy of Cosmos (Hahn 2001). Toconstruct its map; he adapted the distances and diametersof the stars, moon, and sun form our earth at a ratioof 1: 2: 3. The same ratios characterize the overallstructure of any archaic temple from 8th to 6th centuryBC in Greek islands. In fact, both Anaximander andarchitects imagined the cosmos as a temple, the cosmichouse (Hemingway 2003). He said this world is not asingle one; there are also other worlds which co-exist(Burnet 1892). Who knows, Anaximander must have alsoestablished other models of the cosmos regarding thesetwo topics.

Pythagoras (580 - 520 BC) is best known in historyas the devotion of the ancient Greeks for mathematicsstarts from him, towards numerical reality. It is said thatvisiting the pyramids of Egypt, he wanted to discover thebasic conception behind such gigantic form. However, Heand his ancestors imagined that “all things are numbers”to govern the development of the world. Pythagorasalso found essences in numbers. Infinite numbers arefemale, finite numbers are male; the first kind is ofnegative quality while second type represents virtues.Combination of this indicates the Dualism (Islam 2000).Here intellectualism was prior, experience was neglected.Likewise, a dot represents number 1, another dot beside itmeans notion of line; thus number 2 is for line. Number 3represents the area and number 4 represents any volume.Again, number 1 is for God, 2 for female, 3 for male, 4for justice, 5 (2+3) for marriage or offspring, etc. areexamples of numeric mysticism (Heart 1998). BeforePythagoras, it is estimated that musical harmony andcosmic harmony are the same things. But he discovered,“harmonic mean is harmonic progression”. The firstdefinite mathematical influence over architecture wasindebted to this discovery; harmonious sounds dependedon the ratios of small integers. This led the Greek

architects to design according to a module, a basic unitof length; where the dimensions are small integer thatmultiples the basic length (Bowra 1958). Pythagoreannumbers had Geometrical properties also, as geometryis a study of shapes and patterns; it could easily bedetermined by numbers and they also developed a notionof aesthetics based on proportion. Pythagorean Theoremin geometry (a2+b2=c2) as well as in architecture isthe best example of this. According to Plato, Number3, 4 and 5 were used to better explain PythagoreanTheorem of right angle triangle. In addition, to expressharmonious beauty in geometrical regularity Symmetry(word comes from Greek architectural term Symmetria)was applied in Greek architecture which suggests anunderlying action of any grouped elements by an equalbasic configuration. In fact, for many centuries in Europe;architects were required to be mathematicians first forsuch reason (Salingaros 1999).

Parmenides (515 BC - 460 BC) observed the cosmosas a perpetual structure as everything that exists nowhas always been existed. He mentioned that “Existence”is timeless, uniform and unchanging. Parmenides alsobelieved that “all is one” and four basic elements (fire,water, earth and air) to construct this “one being” whichis beyond any dependency or “Otherness”. This othernessincludes “Not being” (change, motion) and “Becoming”(the process) (Nabi 2011). Parmenides tried to discoverthis unique constant in his cosmogony. During 405-454AD, it was recollected by a Roman general named Aetius,“There are circular bands wound round one upon theother, one made of the rare, the other of the dense; andothers between these mixed of light and darkness. Whatsurrounds them all is solid like a wall. Beneath this, afiery band covers a solid at middle, around which againis a fiery band. The center is for all the origin and causeof motion and becoming.” (Guthrie 1962).

Zeno of Elea (490 - 430 BC) developed an argumentagainst Pythagorean thought in two ways: against speedand against pluralism, the second one is contextual forthis study. Plurality is comprised of uncountable smallunits. If these units lose their magnitude, it should not

87


have a magnitude as a whole. For attestable accounts ofmathematical infinity, this plurality is indefinite to thewhole also. Because we can divide any material by thesmallest parts but it may take infinite time. Thus hebelieves that those who treats “being” as absolute andundividable are logical enough (Halim 2010). architecturemay accept his plurality against infinite mathematics.

Empedocles (490 - 430 BC) provided his cosmogonisttheory from the influence of Heraclitus, basically a denialof Parmenides’s permanence. Empedocles said thatall the “Becoming” are results of composition and/ordecomposition of these four Classical elements (Halim2010). He also identified these elements with the mythicalcharacters: Zeus as fire, Hera as air, Nestis as water, andAidoneus is earth. Again, he believed that two oppositedivine powers, Love and Strife, co-exists in the inert formof sphere. They indicate attractive and repulsive forces,respectively. Strife works on the surface of sphere andlove works on the core. Thus sphere is the embodimentof the pure existence (God). The rest of the forms we seeas phenomena are result of imbalance of love over strifeor vice versa and thus these are considered as pervertedforms of sphere (Rahman 2011).

Anaxagoras (510 - 428 BC) was the first Ionianphilosopher in Athens during the reign of Pericles. Hedescribed the world is a result of a series of initial vortex.There should be a reason for ordering all the things, whichhe identified as a cosmic mind; “Nous”; the absolute being.It is a homogeneous substance and teleological principalto create only the best possible thing. The rests (fire,air, water, earth) are basic elements or seeds to composethe world (Nabi 2011). Another notable idea he providedthat Milky Way (Via Lactea) is concentration of distantstars. He attempted to give a scientific explanation ofthe heavenly bodies: eclipses, meteors, and the sun; allthese were masses of fiery stones departed from the earth(Burnet 1892).

Protagoras, (490 - 420 BC) a friend of Pericles;proclaims “Man is the measure of all things”. This ismost powerful statement of Greek philosophy regardingarchitecture in accordance to its mathematical analogy,ergonomics and relative perception of the scale. It seemsthat he was well ahead of his era (Nabi 2011).

Socrates (470 - 399 BC) was pioneer for the denialof sophist school (literally means “the teachers”). Hisconception of moral virtue is most famously capturedin the picturesque narration at “Allegory of the Cave”.“Shadowism” was more explicitly depicted at thedescription of its Dividing line: a paradoxical analogywherein Socrates argues that the invisible world is themost intelligible “noeton” and that the visible world“(h)oraton” is the least knowable and the most obscureone (Alam and Nabi 2009). Later, Plato might haverelated this mystic conception in his Theory of Forms.We may acquire concepts by perceptual experience of anyphysical objects, but we can easily be mistaken if we thinkthat the concepts we have grasped were on the same levelas the objects we just perceived. For instance, seeing acolumn and to see the shadow of a column is not the samething. Besides, our mind has some well-set inherent and

universal ideas, thus experience is always not fundamentalto acquire knowledge (Alam and Nabi 2009).

Plato (427 - 327 BC) is contextual to this study for hisDoctrine of idealism which states existing world and allthe objects of it are just imperfect copies of an ideal orreal world. Ideal is free from any change or mutation andcannot be destroyed. Thus our world could be dividedinto two realms- world of opinion (earthly) & world ofidea (heavenly). Ideal is created as an efficient causeby its creator, “Demiurge” (Alam and Nabi 2009). Now,what was the “idea” of ideal? Idea is not real beings; buthas motionless and independent existence. It is beyondtime and space; thus universal. Ideas/Archetypes are notknowable through sensation; rather by reason and somepreset instincts. Without idea the world would be a massof unclassified and unmeaning particularities of sensation.On the other hand, Idea brings fulfillment to any object;otherwise, every object becomes non-perceptual whenthey are not associated with idea. Hierarchy in Platonicidea (Figure 5) constructs a pyramid of Socrates’s moralgood where God is the highest idea (Rahman 2011).Plato believed, Ideas are logical essences as well as

Devine by their thoughts. However, let us go for someexamples of ideals: In geometry, triangle has somecommon criterion to be called as “triangle” which is ideal.A figure with perfectly drawn three intersecting lineswhose angles are in a sum of 180 degrees called to be theideal triangle. Any form of triangle that we experiencewill be an imperfect representation of this ideal triangleregardless of how precise the measuring and drawing toolswe used, even drawn to the point where our senses cannotperceive a defect, we will never be able to recreate thisperfect shape by its essence. All the triangles of theworld are imitation of this ideal. Correspondingly, unityof homogeneous things can represent a particular ideal.There are lots of temples but ideal temple is one, whichwill represent the Cosmos.

Figure 5. Pyramid of Plato’s moral Idealism

For cosmological quest, Plato believed earth, moon,sun, stars all are rigidly attached to a sphere whichrotates in its own circular axis. Circle shares the sameaesthetics of sphere. This circle is a perfect path, presents

88


changeless and eternal order of heaven. Thus sphere is themost beautiful among the solids thus divine and good.Likewise, the drawn circle could be imperfect but theconception of circle goes on forever.

Aristotle (384 - 322 BC) was the last frontier of Greeceand the pioneer of “formal logic” who gave the conceptof “abstraction” instead of Plato’s Idealism (Alam andNabi 2009). His metaphysics of abstraction includes fourcategories: universal, form, idea & substance. Again,all the materials need eight subcategories also: quantity,posture, texture, space, time etc. He believed experienceis the source of knowledge while information and reasonsconstruct the base of this knowledge. He criticizes Platoby two main criticisms: based on the relation withinherence regarding Realism and difficulty of creatingconcepts without sense-perception by questioning itssource (Rahman 2011).Aristotle derived causality theory which involves both

cause and reason and he believed that relationshipbetween idea and created thing is brought by a thirdparticle. For example, a temple is to be made, therewe need four causes: where stone is Material cause,conception of column drums of it is Formal cause.Tools (nails, hammers etc.) those are available tobuild it and the construction techniques like Anathyrasisand Empolion and also the architect’s active motion(involvement with his brain and muscles) - all are underEfficient cause, and a built temple is the Final cause.Later, he developed a two staged concept regarding this:if all the elements are the Materials in a broad sense,[constructive cause] then the built temple, includingformal, efficient and final causes in it is the Concept orForm [root cause].

6 THE SYNTHESIS OF PHILOSOPHICALTERMS WITH ARCHITECTURALVOCABULARY

6.1 Form

Socrates believed that form formulate a solution to theproblem which is universal. Form is “thought body”and Thought is synonymous to the Being. This Form issomewhat decided ideal by Plato (Nabi 2011). Accordingto Plato, forms are mind independent paradigms andinherent in the particulars. Particulars are said toparticipate in the form. For example, a particular stoneis said to be a copy of the form of “stonehood” and thestone’s whiteness is an instance for the form of whiteness.Particulars are not formless and the Forms cannot becomprised without inert particulars. Forms are capableof being instantiated by many different particulars and toinherent many particulars means having multiple copies.These copies exist only as they instantiate the perfectversions of themselves. According to R. M. Hare, Platoinherited such abstract thinking as secure basis for hisphilosophical thinking from Pythagoreans and shared thesame “mystical approach” which is probably seen as thebirth of Orphism (Jowett 2015). Plato’s doctrine ofrecollection states that souls are born with the concepts

of the forms, as they were in close contact with theseforms in the Platonic heaven (priori knowledge) beforetheir birth. That’s why Plato is known as one ofthe very first rationalists - critics rather say mystic.Shape is unnecessary part of form because form includesorganization which coherent one part with another andagain, all parts coherent as a whole.Plato believed, the Objects can be considered as

real and unreal at the same time. They are realbecause they have dominant similarities to the idealform. They are unreal also as we know, nothing canbe copied meticulously and after having such preciseddissimilarities, they are only the unreal copies of idealforms. In fact, the objects are sustaining in a stage amidstbeing and non-being. In order to conceive the eminenceof ideal and universal, one must be able to conceiveabstract form in known material. Again, Plato thinksthat Material or Object and Form are relative like fluid.A Material could be Form or Form could be Material, ifwe change our perspective. Wood is Material as a columnbut it is also a form as a growing tree. Changing Materialor change in Material; both are responsible for “Being”.Now, Aristotle asked, what makes change in any

Object? Answer is the “drive or motion” that createsany final Form by transformations. When Form includesfunctions, it becomes final. Now, Forms and Idea bothare universal but Materials are of specific characteristics.Forms are transient and do not exist outside the Objects.Form and Material co-exist and cannot be separated.That’s why, Material tries to connect with Forms andForm always tries to connect with Material; thus changesoccur continuously. Truth to be said: Idea, Form andMaterial are the same things. The desired goal of anyIdea is Form. This Form is accumulation of internal andexternal relationship and an ideal framework to constructobject. And finally, Materials are containers for Formsand they are possibility for all things. For example, ifwe consider the relationship of a stone with a columndrum of a Greek temple, where stone is the Materialwhich transformed into a desired Form (column). Butagain, stone could be measured as a Form in relation withits natural settings, the hill; from where it is collected.So, Material is something which goes through a chain ofchanges or on which change do occurs.Aristotle again investigates, how does this change

occur? If any Material acquires some “Quality”, thenit turns into a Form. When Object swayed by Qualityis considered as Material and formless material is thepossibility only. Thus formless object don’t exist as“being” and it is beyond our perception. On the otherhand, Quality does not exist without Material. Materialis substratum for an Object and it is characterless andindefinite. It seems generally that Material comes first,not the Form. In fact, Forms come first, and then weneed Materials to construct it. So, the Final is establishedat the onset, subconsciously. If the stone is potentiality,then to achieve a desired Form (temple or column) by thismaterial is Actuality. For information, Aristotle foundtwo types of quality: primary & secondary. For instance,primary quality of any object is its length, as well as

89


the substance that remains unchanged. But Secondaryquality is color, which fades with time as well as it isvariable (Islam 2000). In “Metaphysics” Aristotle writesthat material principle is of two kinds - Great and Small(Dyad) to make the ideal world intelligible by a principleof order. Since the numbers are derived from duality andthe essence (its participation) is the One, thus Formsare the cause of this essence (Copleston 1947). Duringthe glorious revolution in 1688, John Lock was influencedby Aristotle’s theory of abstraction. However, forms areassociated with beauty which is discussed next.

6.2 Aesthetics

Socrates says that he who sees with his eyes is blind.He believed, Beauty of thought is more mysterious andits impact is more magical than physical beauty. In hisSymposium, (Many critics believe that an influence ofPythagoras, Heraclitus and Parmenides on Plato) Platoinsists that training to perceive beauty is indispensableto perfect human life since it leads the self to aproper orientation within the universe. Those whopossessed the keenest ability to perceive beauty hadcome closest to immortality. The discernment of beautyin thoughts, emotions, actions and society is to drawout the true virtue (Nabi 2011). Similarly, in Islamicaesthetics the perception of beauty is synonymous tomoral implications. The central ethic of Islamic arts isto live as if “Whatsoever way you turn is the face ofGod” inscribed at quaranic verses of 2nd Segment, 115thsentence (Kazzam 2011).

Plato distinguishes characteristics between relative andabsolute form in accordance to aesthetics. Relative formsare those which have beauty as well as ratio inherent inthe nature of living things or in the imitations of thesenatural things. On the other hand, absolute forms arethe abstractions: the shapes created by different tools.Shapes are immutable like the single, pure and smoothtone of music (Alam and Nabi 2009). Plato writes inPhilebus that representation of living thing’s beauty, bycircle, rectilinear form, solid surfaces created with toolslike compass, cord or Set Square are always beautiful inthemselves. Forms are of two kinds: architectonic andsymbolic. If Architectonic form is apart from content, ittends to become symbolic (Read 1968). As this World isshadow of ideal world where only beauty is real, we aresearching that beauty which is either absent or in a formof imitation. If not, why do all the earthly things do decayor destroy? In addition, Aristotle was also passionate totie Beauty and Goodness in human and at the same timehe tries to distinguish the “Beautiful” from the Good.Thus he proclaimed, conception of “absolute Beauty”like Plato’s ideal is impossible and we should ignore itssearch (Nabi 2011). For a well-lived life, virtues shouldbe placed at the center of our mind and it should berelative to its context. Paraphrases of Aristotle remind usthe deep-seated laws of nature tend in the multitudinoustransformation to one form to another to acquire beautyin different stages and then decease (Kline 1964).

6.3 Space

Against the philosophy of Thales, (water is the ultimatereality) Anaximander derives a theory of Apeiron(boundless) from where the Universe had originated bythe separation of opposites in the primordial matter.These opposite bodies always deviate to create new thingsbut they are not exhausted. Anaximander’s such idea wasinfluenced by the original thought of Chaos (gaping voidor formless state) after mythical Greek cosmogony fromwhich everything else appeared. Plato developed somedefined notions of Chora and Topos to explain the originof Existence and the process of Becoming. Chora refersa place where extension in space and any object bothare in the process of Becoming at that particular space;while Topos refers to an achieved place. “Becoming”involves three elements - that which becomes (object),that which is the ideal for becoming (subject), and theplace or natural setting for becoming (space and time)(Guthrie 1962). Aristotle further refined the idea of howthings exist. Place comes first because everything thatexists has to have a place. It is a necessary startingpoint for understanding not any space, (both the infiniteand void) but also movement and change. The mostgeneral and basic kind of change is the change in respectof place, which is locomotion (Casey 1997). Aristotlerefers Chora to a country and Topos to a region or aplace in it; while both are finite and can contain objects.Again, his concept of Kenon refers to void, limitless finitespace and is different from the place notions of Chora andTopos (Nabi 2011). According to Plato, geometry is theknowledge of eternally existent and Space is perceptualin geometry. Space was subjective to atomic philosopherslike Democritus (Rahman 2011).

Figure 6. Plan of Parthenon, Acropolis in Athens

7 CASE STUDIES FOR PHILOSOPHICALSEARCH OVER GREEKARCHITECTURE

Two examples are considered here for the convenienceof better perception of the above discussion and forestablishing certain relation between architecture andphilosophy, first one is of architectural plan and anotheris for the design details.

90


7.1 Parthenon

Already in about 2500 years we are encountered withmagnificently symmetric and aesthetically pure; theperfect classic temple of Parthenon (completed between447-432 BCE ). The architects like Ictinus and Callicrates(Vitruvius also names Karpion as another architect)were employed, while chief sculptor was Phidias. It isa Doric temple with 8 columns at the façade and 17columns at the flanks (Fletcher 1987). Parthenon showsa rare practice as introduction of the Ionic order in apredominately Doric temple.Berger’s well established theory for the ratio of 9:4

initiates the vertical and horizontal proportions of thetemple. The temple’s spacing between the columns andcolumn height is the best example of this. It shows howPythagorean ratios of small numbers; the ratio 2: 3 andits square 4: 9 were fundamental for its design. A basicrectangle with sides 4 and 9 was constructed by threerectangular modules of (3 × 4) dimension, each having adiagonal of 5. Pythagorean triangle used to ensure theright angles accurately. Thus the form of constructionultimately acquires the ratio of 3: 4: 5. The length of theTemple is 69.5 m, its width is 30.88 m and the height atthe cornice is 13.72 m. To a fairly high degree of accuracy,this means that the ratio of width: length and the ratioof height: width, both are 4: 9.Again, Berger considered the greatest common

denominator of these measurements and found the ratiosof height: width: length is 16: 36: 81. It gives a basicmodule of 0.858 m. Accordingly, the length of the Templeis 92 modules, its width is 62 modules and its height is42 modules. The module length was used throughout, forexample; the overall height of the columns are 12 moduleshigh. The Naos (interior space of temple containing thestatue) is 21.44 m wide and 48.3 m long which againresembles the ratio of 4: 9. Berger notes the amazingfact that the columns are 1.905 m in diameter and thedistance between their axes is 4.293 m, again in a ratio of4: 9. Approximately 13400 stones of such modules wereused to build the temple (Robertson and O’Connor 2002).

Figure 7. Basic rectangle module of Parthenon, withratio of 4:9

For Conventional thinking, F Röber and also JayHambidge argued in 1855, that golden section was used byAttic Greek architects for designing Parthenon and otherancient Greek buildings. Röber was optimist enough toprobe that it was an imitation of Egyptian pyramids. Itis still a dubious proposition as there appears a littlehard evidence to support those views. Golden sectionis still contextual in debate but analysis varies as there

are numerous approaches to prove the existence of iton design and its effect on dimensions to fit the goldenrectangle on the façade of Parthenon (Ching 1943).

7.2 The Three Distinct Column Orders

From 6th century BC, Classical Column orders influencedthe world of architecture for last two millennia. Itis a language of architectural form which has alsosome connotative meanings. It conveys the notion ofdemocracy in Europe. In the new world like America,it indicates presence of civilization (Ching 1943). Thethree orders are discussed below:In Doric order, columns are fluted and baseless, capital

consisting of abacus (flat slab) and echinus (cushion-likeslab). Temple of Hera at Olympia dated 580 BC, knownas the earliest example of Doric order and peripheraltemple, was the predominant style among all the Greektemples of mainland. The Greek temples had peristylecolonnade trend before than 800 BC and Doric order wasresponsible to create this formation (Pevsner et al. 1998).

Figure 8. Corinthian capital, Odeion of Agrippa, in thelate first century BC

Ionic order developed just later than Doric; herebases support the columns, have more vertical flutes,capitals have two volutes; on that rests a band ofpalm-leaf ornaments atop. The Abacus is narrow andthe entablature (The feature rests over the columns)usually consists of three simple horizontal bands. Themost important feature of the Ionic order is its frieze,which is usually carved with relief sculpture arranged ina continuous pattern around the building (Hemingway2003). Ionic order was more popular in Asia Minor(Ionia) and peripheral Greek islands. Ancient Architectsused Ionic order not only for small and delicate buildingssuch as the Treasury of Delphi, but also for monumentalstructures like Temple of Artemis at Ephesus (6th centuryBC) which was considered as one of the seven wonders ofancient era.Over all, Ionic order is a more ornamental and graceful

style, but it lacks the clarity and power of the Doricstyle. As a result, ancient critics regarded Doric orderas masculine and Ionic as feminine. For example,Ionic columns shaped a taller central passageway in thePropylaea, reflecting the importance of motherhood.A third order named Corinthian, first developed in the

91


late Classical period (last decades of 5th century BC)and was more common in the Hellenistic, Roman andsubsequent civilizations. The Corinthian order representsIonic in most aspects, but has tall capitals called Echinus,which is shaped as upside-down bell and decorated withrows of acanthus leaves, vine like spirals named helixesand palmettoes (Fletcher 1987). There is also a pair ofsmall volutes at each corner to provide the same view fromall sides. The first known Corinthian column stood aloneinside the Cella at the Temple of Apollo in Epicurus atBassae, where sanctuary and alter was allocated againstthe oblique wall’s flank built during the years of 420-410BC in the heights of the Arcadian mountains, a well-chosen place for oracle. The west-east orientation of Doricfacades was to heal the chariot of sun God Apollo, as amere reflection of their cosmic thoughts (Nilsson 1967).For information, inside the Adyton (center of oracle andseat of goddess Pythia) of Apollo’s Delphi temple, thestatement “Know thyself” was carved (Ring et al. 1994).

Figure 9. Pevsner

8 FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

8.1 Democracy: Offering Nobility in GreekArchitecture

For radical culture of ancient Greece, democracy allowedthem to meet forty times per year where voice of eachcitizen got values at the center stage of Acropolis.Anaximander’s projection on cosmology “Earth is at thecenter of universe”, invented such a new political orderwhich eventually led a new space organized around acenter, the Senate: the static point of the democraticsystem in Greek socio-political context. It is decentnow; Literature’s impact on architecture could be seen asits correlation with Anaximander’s “constructive” prose,appropriating the idea of architects. Question is whycommon people were depicted as individuals at theParthenon frieze and Pediment? Every citizen of thecity was recognized as a significant entity (a considerablemoving force) in the Acropolis, their observable universe.In fact, parts of the whole or the whole as a part;architecture reflected their constitution from very grassroot level: the sense of integration as an allotment ofGreek anthropomorphic metaphors or notions. Here, afragment of such moldings, as constant modules are stillcontextual to remodel the archaeological sites of Greece.Do these modules were invented from a democraticthought? This is really possible as democracy indicates

the unity. Now, why this philosophy of integration wasimportant? Zeno’s argument of plurality may comparethe stone modules discovered by Berger as finite andconclusive for the rationalization of his absolute.

Figure 10. Parthenon of Acropolis, side view at night(Courtesy of Adnan Morshed)

8.2 Modules: Human at the Center

How they become to derive these pieces like modernbrick? For a quantitative approach, we can say thatHuman scale and proportion could be relative butthe only one parameter that we have, to justify anyspace and built form by scaling material dimension.Agonistic Protagoras has been misjudged from this pointof view as difference between sense and thought, reasonand perception was beyond the intelligibility of thatera. We have to bear in mind, sense and perceptionare particular (individual) but thought and reason areuniversal. We cannot make a color blind convincedwith his optical sense, but only with reason. Again,Euclidian geometry can also be probe by reasons, notsense or perception. Protagoras is fundamental fortheir architecture by ergonomics and Anaxagoras’s cosmicmodel is an interesting clue for temple orientation.Both Anaxagoras and Protagoras was close friend andcontemporary to Pericles, the builder of acropolis afterthe battle of salamis, did the philosophers inspiredarchitects like Ictinus and Callicrates to take any decisionurged by Pericles regarding their capital’s planning andthe Parthenon architecture? It is very possible.

8.3 Scale and Proportion: Affection toMathematics and Geometry

We also know that Mathematics behind architecturereflects the consequence of Pythagorean philosophy anda consequence of Platonic mysticism, these Great Greekphilosophers derived the fundamental basis along withaesthetics & virtues for all important architecturaldecisions: Balance and Perfection. The ratio of 9:4seems the Mathematical quest between austere anddelicate visual characteristics; that exactly Parthenonfollowed. Sometimes confusion arises in the geometricalbase of Greek architecture. We have to bear in ourmind that to design an architectural plan especiallythe temples and to fix proportionate façade is not thesame thing. While Pythagoreans were well established

92


by cult, Euclid and Plato were only contemporary toParthenon. Euclidian geometry and golden proportionconcept both are latter additions or incidental, butPythagorean numeric philosophy and geometry was thebasis for temple architecture, indeed.

8.4 Pythagorean Numeric Characters:Meaning of Architecture

Another significant point is noticeable, no matter whatclassical order and which deity any temple belongs to,the facade consists of three main parts: steps, columnsand entablature. Each of these parts also had three oftheir own. For example, Columns have three sections:a base, shaft, and capital. Again, the Entablaturehas three deviations: an architrave (plain horizontalbeam resting on column), a frieze (corresponded tothe beams support ceiling) and a triangular cornice (aset of decorative moldings that overhung with its partbelow). We are fortunate enough that Vitruvius’s theoryon classical architecture in his Book 1 Chapter 3, thata building must exhibit three important qualities, aTriad: Firmitas, Utilitas, Venustas (often translated asfirmness, commodity, and delight). That is, a buildingmust be strong, useful and beautiful. Vitruvius doesnot describe the need to create balance between thesequalities. However, why number three was implementedfor all these cases? Three means the first true malenumber and number of harmony to Pythagoras. Again,the number two is the first even or female number andnumber of opinion. The number five is for marriage(2+3). Thus squares of 2 and 3 were adopted to constructtheir temples in such ratio 4:9. Male and female as wellas harmony and opinion to erect the premise of worship:quite relevant to the Greek Pagan thoughts.

8.5 Ideal is Idea or, Idea is Ideal

From qualitative approach of this study Plato is morecircumstantial with his “ideal” thoughts. As we all arethe parts of haven (priori) or cosmos and we have toreturn there. Thus the Abide of Gods (temples) should beintegrating as architecture was the spiritual legacy of theirglory. The module of foundation stone, a rudimentaryidea for all kind of construction throughout westernarchitectural history; from a single building to cityscapecould be seen as the brainchild of this mystic idealism.Along with well-established theories for Greek

architecture, have we thought that Plato’s Theory ofForms may cope with the Functional point of view? Platoestablished Academy in 387 AD where he wrote in theentrance that those who don’t have any knowledge aboutmathematics (and geometry) shouldn’t enter here. Apartfrom mathematics, his education system also stresseson two subjects, music and athletics, thus facilities likeAmphitheatre and Gymnasium ought to be contextualto his philosophy. Various Greek architectural typesemerged at different times, might have enriched andrefined over time but rarely abandoned or replaced.Once established, remained fundamental for forever. For

exemplification, Temple’s Cella, the Stoa, the Senate, theAgora, Theater, Gymnasiums, the Stadium and Baths -all are still contextual to us. Greek architects used limitedsource of materials to develop a distinct range of buildingtypes while each served some fixed purposes-religious,civic, domestic, funerary, or recreational. Does not thispractice indicate the “idealism” which is immortal butcan be copied in various ways where the core thought isconstant? How many architects have been able to or willbe able to change the basic configuration of a stadium,for instance; till to date? Did the ancient master masonsecho the Platonic thoughts from very beginning of theirwork? Over time their idea to erect a stadium remainedunchanged or universal, although stadiums have beenruined and is still building in every corners of the worldwith the same concept.

8.6 Allegory of Blendscape

What about their theatres? Does “Allegory of cave”share the same origin with puppet show, mask traditionor Athenian tragedy? It is known, Greek tragedywhich had long tradition since around 532 BC todramatize heartbreaking and educative events from Greekmythology; but a notable exception was brought afterBattle of Salamis in 480 BC, which stages the Persianresponse to the news of their military defeat at thePersepolis. Estimated time period of Socrates (470 - 399BC) indicates when he was born, the Greek parodies arealready well established for ten years and he might alsohave enjoyed these in his childhood. Again, when Mostfamous dramatist of ancient Greece; Aeschylus won thefirst prize at the city of Dionysus in 472 BC, he hadbeen writing tragedies for more than 25 years, thus bothSocrates and Plato (428 - 348 BC) are within the rangeof this timeline where parodies along with tragedies arewell recognized all over the Greek islands. Later Aristotleclassified these tragedies as crux. Theatre of Delphi wasbuilt in the 4th century BC and theatre of Epidauruswas established in 350 BC by Polycleitus the Younger.Moreover, theatre of Dionysus in Athens, the earlieststone Skene, Bieber (1961) undergone through massiverefurbishment during the fourth century BC and had apermanent stage extending in front of the orchestra anda three-tiered seating area (theatron) that stretched upthe slope. It is the building which was allocated directlyin back to stage and usually decked as a palace, temple,or other building, depending on their needs. It had atleast one set of doors as actors could make entrancesand exits. There was also access to the roof from behindfor the actors only who were playing any God/Goddesscharacters. The building also had projecting Paraskenia(wings at both ends) to accommodate movable scenery(Dinsmoor 1950). Again, a passageway for entry and exitfor chorus team and actors on two sides of orchestra wasknown as Parodos. The Audience can use this way onlybefore and after any performance. Doesn’t it remind usthe dividing line of the “Allegory of cave”? Did Socratesor Plato bring the idea of their philosophical statementof such cave for the architects to erect “built settings”

93


of a drama stage by make an imaginary environment?On the other hand, did puppet shows of their childhoodhave created some impact over these philosophers’ mind?As we know that Plato wrote his “allegory of cave” at“Phaedo” which is no more earlier than 385 BC; whilesome scholars refer it was a work around 416 BC, thismight be true for the planning of Epidaurus Theaterbuilt by Polycleitus who started his theater before twoyears of Plato’s death. In fact, this study suggestssuch proposition because from 410 BC to 340 BC, thetime ranges of the changed Greek zest of drama and itsarchitectural settings. In fact, as we know that gentlemendo think alike; probably their theater architecture was anendeavor to reach the metaphysical ideal by the dint ofreal materials or to take that challenge of bringing the“divine shadow” in reality, vice versa. Plato explains theworld of appearances, where one’s sensory faculty ledto false and deceitful conceptions. Sun and fire at the“Allegory of cave” could be narrated as real and unreal atthe same time. “Allegory of cave” visually is nothing buta “Blendscape” of architecture and landscape by the dintof “Shadowism”.Here, Landscape architecture comes to an account,

that why Greece and India were only able to chaseown philosophy? A Greek mentor sitting on a highstone in front of his pupils to describe any saga anda Guru sitting under the banyan tree surrounded byfollowers in Indian subcontinent - both might be thesame schooling of thought regardless of their culturebut definitely responsive to their topography. Relationbetween Architecture and landscape can be comparableto Aristotle’s duality of small and great. Threecharacteristics of architectural decision come from theambience of surroundings: topography, climate andtectonic gravity. Ground work as well as to nurture

landscape like a farmer, his affection to the crops is anontological exertion for architects. For example, amidarable soil was selected as temple site for Dionysus, a godrelated to harvest while rocky site was for Apollo andArtemis, the deities related to hunting (Retallack 2008).

8.7 White Poetry of Purity

From late 300 BC, introduction of stone as buildingmaterial started from Ionia and spread all over the Greekworld later. White stones, stucco and tufa; were notonly the easy found materials, but also suitable conceptof simplicity contrasting the blue sky; such instinctand intuitiveness reminds that architecture starts fromnature. The probable character of hoary antiquity inwhite-blue composition reflects the transition to morecivilized architecture, thus became a common concord.One may raise question that Greeks have used color intheir architecture but we have to bear in mind, onlydetails were colored with red and blue or occasionallyblack. The structural parts like column, Geison,Architrave was left unpainted or tiled with white stucco.

8.8 Orientation: Cosmic but Esoteric

Plato also said that proper orientation within the universeis imperative to sense of aesthetics as well as virtue. Theconventional east west orientation of Greek temple wasiconic. But exceptional elongation of two Apollo templesamongst his all 14 temples, at Epicurus (430 BC) andat Thermos (3rd century BC); are stretched toward theMilky Way’s northeast to south orientation which comesfrom mythopoeic source: in a direction to the drivewayof Apollo’s chariot from the North Pole Hyperborean(Liritzis and Vassiliou 2006). There might have some

Figure 11. Theatre of Epidaurus, established in 350 BC (Courtesy of Adnan Morshed)

94


Figure 12. The time line of theatre and its philosophical analysis

indication from the architects’ part as the temple hadentry approach with the same orientation to Anaxagoras’s(died in 428 BC) Milky Way. And his astronomicalinvention was a catalyst for this new design thoughtwithin next two years after is dead, indeed. Besides,God of light, facilitate east and west by the temple’slong length which allowed sunlight in the interior. Wecan say, Apollo temple was center for unconventionalthinking as Corinthian order was conceived from here.Another example is of Dike; the steering goddess ofJustice and key holder, was erected at the center of thetemple’s Cella, protecting the treasures beneath alter.It is the darkest part and surrounded by walls. Again,the wall is enclosed by columns and again, columns aresurrounded by steps- a perfect reflection of Parmenides’sseven layered bands of his cosmogony. Is it incidental forGreek temple design? Probably, these are the exampleshow scientific thoughts shaped the myth and how mythsshaped their architecture while architects had to satisfythe both. Religious need was superficial but rationalimaginations interplayed with the designing. However,although buildings are also not permanent, Plato saw thatthey were long lasting and therefore more beautiful to himthan ephemeral flowers.

8.9 Platonic Solids: Thirst for Search

Now, Platonic solids are consequential from architectonicforms that Empedocles searched as distinct powers in themythical characters. All around the world, we have fourplatonic solids: cube, sphere, pyramid (may include coneand reflects fire, the power of Zeus) and cylinder. Thereis nothing possible to add with these.Like Anaximander and Empedocles, Plato had great

fondling to sphere. Sphere does not represent air asoctahedron does but it is Arial and reflects Hera’s abilityto birth. It remains constant from every view. Theshadow of sphere could be a circle and the circle can be

engulfed in a square. That’s why squares derive cubicforms and Greek temples are the elongated version ofcubes by the dint of golden section. Sphere, as a formwas practically difficult to construct in that era, butflexible shape like square that could easily be engulfedin a circle; two dimensional representation or shadowof Sphere, was recurrently used with perverted shapeof rectangle. Was this falsification deliberately doneby Greek architects, just pretending to make a copyof the “ideal”? Islamic architecture depicted the nextscenario of such abstraction by firm monotheist believersof nonfigurative art where believe was changed but nottheir quest.

Figure 13. Five platonic solids: cone, cylinder, cube,sphere and pyramid

This Cube reflects earth and it is highly recognizableamong the solids. It reflects the concrete concept ofunderworld as god Aidoneus (or Hades, brother of Zeus)bears the characteristics in netherworld, the kingdomof dead and earthy riches. Plato’s dialogue “Cratylus”depicts Aidoneus with “his knowledge (eidenai) of allnoble things” (West 2007). His theory of recollection

95


might have influenced temple architecture as templesare the symbols of cosmos and adobe of the souls, thusHeaven and underworld captured in a single structure.Together, the cube (earth) and the sphere (air) form adual pair.Cylinder is the shape of earth and has axis passing

through its circular faces, like two poles of earth. Bunchof cylinders can be identified as linear elements whichexpress movement across space. Like movements of theseries of earths around a cosmic core in Greek temples.Here parallel column row in front of solid walls createsan abstract sense of transparent surface plane by castingshadows on it, an attempt to create cosmic model.

8.10 Time Trapped in the Column

Finally, let us consider the evolution of cylindricalcolumn orders. A philosophical text of Plato namedthe Symposium of 385-370 BC; discussing the genesis,purpose and nature of love, and the original conceptionof Platonic love in latter-day interpretations is sourceof keen ambiguity. Here Plato asked, Why had love“Eros” (earthly & Devine) been created? And answered,human was created with duality (male & female in samebody), with four hands & legs. Then Zeus divided itand created the sexes, that’s why we are searching forcontinuous Love and Way of life (Ideal state). Corinthianorder did not appear in exterior temple colonnades andused widespread until illiterate. Romans got involved.We know, Goddess of women and marriage; Hera wasdedicated by the first Doric temple. While Artemis,Goddess of the hunt, wild animals, or wilderness wasdevoted for the first Ionic temple and her twin brother,Apollo; God of light and the sun, truth and prophecy,healing, plague, music, poetry, oracle and more, wasgifted only one Corinthian column in the Cella. If Doricand Ionic columns are considered as male and female,then Corinthian column is to be result of Platonic love?Is this the reason that the column was not exposed andonly erected at Cella of the temple of Apollo who isgod of truth, oracle and prophecy, thus kept secret?Again, is not Parmenides is contingent in this regardwho believed in existence of timeless? Greek architectsbuilt such “timeless” columns in expression, as columnexists had always been existed! Today, Greek column ischosen as the emblem of modern democracy by Americanforefathers.To recapitulate, Greek philosophers imagined

convenient cosmic space to express their thoughtand borrowed architect’s techniques to constructphilosophical literature. On the other hand, theirarchitects also learned the sense of proportion andimplied that as universal ideal. According toTheories of universals, modern Platonism may includea thesis that architecture is not created but it isdiscovered. Aristotelian dyad was reflected to constructGreek temples as great and small proportions werecomplimentary similarly to any biological body; to createthe “principle of order”, between the dualism of materialand form. Remarkably such dualism was earlier narrated

in several ways: love and strife at Empedocles’s sphere,universal and ideal with realism at Platonic idealism.Answers are not mandatory but several Questions are

raised, could be imperative verdict of this study.

9 CONCLUSION

Pythagorean numbers, Platonic ideal form, Aristotelianabstraction all are the same conception to constitutethe Greek realm of architecture. The aestheticsthey derived from mathematics or rational and mysticthinking was great achievements that wrought in thefirst enlighten age of mankind. Ideal and mysticthought added some esoteric value to their architecture,executed as talisman to the magnetism of unseenpowers; nevertheless geometry helped to achieve extremeelegance in simplicity. Their socio-political viewrealized the necessity of unity which evolved throughtheir architecture to assemble with unique functionality.Religious Metaphors and symbols were chosen and placedcarefully but not dominant and the appearance of theseindicates the reasons of their religious believe. That’s whyGreek architecture remained relevant, ideal and classicover times. These treatments were repeated throughages but without the source of intellectuality, whichonly had deep root to Greek philosophical thoughts.To recapitulate, the study wants to proclaim thatancient Greece experienced a conjugal triumph of artand science, while golden touch of benevolent philosophyneed a witness and that could be Greek architecture.The study recommends further discourses to reveal theinterdisciplinary researches of both two subjects to builda common platform in order to bring light from unknownnewfangled point of view of known history.

REFERENCES

Alam, R. M. and Nabi, N. (2009). History of westernphilosophy. Bangla Academy, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Alexander, C., Ishikawa, S., and Silverstein, M. (1977).A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction.Oxford University Press, New York, USA.

Argan, G. C. and Robb, N. A. (1946). “The Architectureof Brunelleschi and the Origins of Perspective Theoryin the Fifteenth Century.” Journal of the Warburg andCourtauld Institutes, 9, 96–121.

Bari, M. A. (1995). Tells of philosophy. Prothoma, Dhaka,Bangladesh.

Bieber, M. (1961). The History of the Greek and RomanTheatre. Princeton University Press, New Jersey, USA.

Bowra, C. M. (1958). The Greek Experience. Weidenfeldand Nicolson, London, UK.

Burnet, J. (1892). Early Greek Philosophy. A. & C. Black,London, UK.

Camp, J. M. and Dinsmoor, W. B. (1984). AncientAthenian Building Methods. ASCSA, New Jersey, USA.

Casey, E. S. (1997). The Fate of Place: A PhilosophicalHistory. University of California Press, Berkeley,California, USA.

96


Ching, F. D. (1943). Architecture: Form, Space, andOorder. John Wiley & Sons, New York, USA.

Ching, F. D., Jarzombek, M. M., and Prakash, V. (2007).A Global History of Architecture. John Wiley & Sons,New Jersey, USA.

Copleston, F. (1947). A History of Philosophy. Vol. I:Greece and Rome. Image, New York, USA.

Dinsmoor, W. B. (1950). The Architecture of AncientGreece: An Account of its Historic Development. Biblo& Tannen Publishers, London, UK.

Durant, W. (1939). The life of Greece: the story ofcivilization. Simon & Schuster, New York, USA.

Faulkner, R., Ziegfeld, E., and Smagula, H. (1986).Art Today, an Introduction to the Visual Arts. HoltMcDougal, USA.

Fletcher, S. B. (1987). A History of Architecture.Butterworths, London, UK, 19th edition.

Graves, R. (1960). The Greek Myths. Vol. 1. Penguin,London, UK.

Guthrie, W. (1962). A History of Greek Philosophy:Volume 2, The Presocratic Tradition from Parmenidesto Democritus. Cambridge University Press, New York,USA.

Hahn, R. (2001). Anaximander and the architects:the contributions of Egyptian and Greek architecturaltechnologies to the origins of Greek philosophy. SUNYPress, Albany, New York, USA.

Halim, M. A. (2010). History of western philosophy:ancient and medieval period. Bangla Academy, Dhaka,Bangladesh.

Heart, M. H. (1998). The best 100 scholars of the worldin history. Bangla Academy, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Hemingway, C. (2003). “Architecture in AncientGreece.” In Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History, TheMetropolitan Museum of Art, New York, USA.

Hoff, A. (2005). The Archaeology of Greece in LateAntiquity. University of Texas press, Texas, USA.

Islam, P. A. (2000). Western philosophy, ancient andmedieval. Bangla Academy, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Jowett, B. (2015). The Plato Collection. Catholic WayPublishing, London UK.

Kazzam, T. R. (2011). Ethics and Aesthetics in IslamicArts, Spotlight on Teaching. American Academy ofReligions, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.

Kline, M. (1964). Mathematics in Western Culture.Oxford University Press, New York, USA.

Lacoue-Labarthe, P. (1993). The Subject of Philosophy.University of Minnesota Press, Minnesota, USA.

Liritzis, I. and Vassiliou, H. (2006). “Were Greek templesoriented towards aurorae?.” Astronomy & Geophysics,47(1), 1–14.

Miller, S. F. (1997). Design Process: A Primer forArchitectural and Interior Design. John Wiley & Sons,New York, USA.

Mosse, C. (1984). La Grece archaique d’Homere aEschyle. Points, Nantes, France.

Nabi, M. N. (2011). History of philosophy: ancient andmedieval. Seba, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Nabi, M. N. and Alam, R. (2009). History of westernphilosophy. Ananya, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Nilsson, M. P. (1967). Geschichte der griechischenreligion: die Greek temples. Handbuch derAltertumswissenschaft, Munich, Germany.

O’Connor, J. J. and Robertson, E. F. (2002).“Mathematics and architecture.” Availableat:<http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk>.

Ostwald, M. J. (2000). “Under siege: The golden mean inArchitecture.” Nexus Network Journal, 2(1-2), 75–82.

Pevsner, N., Honour, H., and Fleming, J. (1998). ThePenguin Dictionary of Architecture and LandscapeArchitecture. Penguin Books, London, UK.

Rahman, M. H. (2011). Basic problems of philosophy.Bangla Academy, Dhaka, Bangladesh.

Read, H. E. (1968). The Meaning of Art. Faber andFaber, London, UK.

Retallack, G. J. (2008). “Rocks, views, soils and plantsat the temples of ancient greece.” Antiquity, 82(317),640–657.

Ring, T., Salkin, R., and Boda, S. (1994). InternationalDictionary of Historic Places: Southern Europe.Fitzroy Dearborn, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Robertson, E. F. and O’Connor, J. J. (2002).“Mathematics and architecture.” Available at<http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk>.

Salingaros, N. A. (1999). “Architecture, patterns, andmathematics.” Nexus Network Journal, 1(1-2), 75–86.

Shuttleworth, M. (2015). “Renaissance architecture.”Available at <https://explorable.com>.

West, M. L. (2007). Indo-European Poetry and Myth.Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

Williams, K. and Duvernoy, S. (2014). “The Shadowof Euclid on Architecture.” The MathematicalIntelligencer, 36(1), 37–48.

Wittkower, R. (1971). Architectural Principles in the Ageof Humanism. WW Norton /& Company, New York,USA.

97

http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk

http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Architecture.html

https://explorable.com/renaissance-architecture

Philosophy of Architecture and Architecture as Philosophy ... · Philosophy of Architecture and Architecture as Philosophy: The Potentialities in Accordance to Critical Sermon ...

Documents