The Ten Books on Architecture
6. So too, in some models it is seen how they appear practicable on the
smallest scale and likewise on a larger. And so the Rhodians, in the
same manner, deceived by the same reasoning, inflicted injury and insult
on Diognetus. Therefore, when they saw the enemy stubbornly hostile,
slavery threatening them because of the machine which had been built to
take the city, and that they must look forward to the destruction of
their state, they fell at the feet of Diognetus, begging him to come to
the aid of the fatherland. He at first refused.
7. But after free-born maidens and young men came with the priests to
implore him, he promised to do it on condition that if he took the
machine it should be his property. When these terms had been agreed
upon, he pierced the wall in the place where the machine was going to
approach it, and ordered all to bring forth from both public and private
sources all the water, excrement, and filth, and to pour it in front of
the wall through pipes projecting through this opening. After a great
amount of water, filth, and excrement had been poured out during the
night, on the next day the helepolis moving up, before it could reach
the wall, came to a stop in the swamp made by the moisture, and could
not be moved forwards, nor later even backwards. And so Demetrius, when
he saw that he had been baffled by the wisdom of Diognetus, withdrew
with his fleet.
8. Then the Rhodians, freed from the war by the cunning of Diognetus,
thanked him publicly, and decorated him with all honours and
distinctions. Diognetus brought that helepolis into the city, set it up
in a public place, and put on it an inscription: "Diognetus out of the
spoils of the enemy dedicated this gift to the people." Therefore, in
works of defence, not merely machines, but, most of all, wise plans must
be prepared.
9. Likewise at Chios, when the enemy had prepared storming bridges on
their ships, the Chians, by night, carried out earth, sand, and stones
into the sea before their walls. So, when the enemy, on the next day,
tried to approach the walls, their ships grounded on the mound beneath
the water, and could not approach the wall nor withdraw, but pierced
with fire-darts were burned there. Again, when Apollonia was being
besieged, and the enemy were thinking, by digging mines, to make their
way within the walls without exciting suspicion, and this was reported
by scouts to the people of Apollonia, they were much disturbed and
alarmed by the news, and having no plans for defence, they lost courage,
because they could not learn either the time or the definite place where
the enemy would come out.
10. But at this time Trypho, the Alexandrine architect, was there. He
planned a number of countermines inside the wall, and extending them
outside the wall beyond the range of arrows, hung up in all of them
brazen vessels. The brazen vessels hanging in one of these mines, which
was in front of a mine of the enemy, began to ring from the strokes of
their iron tools. So from this it was ascertained where the enemy,
pushing their mines, thought to enter. The line being thus found out, he
prepared kettles of hot water, pitch, human excrement, and sand heated
to a glow. Then, at night, he pierced a number of holes, and pouring the
mixture suddenly through them, killed all the enemy who were engaged in
this work.
11. In the same manner, when Marseilles was being besieged, and they
were pushing forward more than thirty mines, the people of Marseilles,
distrusting the entire moat in front of their wall, lowered it by
digging it deeper. Thus all the mines found their outlet in the moat. In
places where the moat could not be dug they constructed, within the
walls, a basin of enormous length and breadth, like a fish pond, in
front of the place where the mines were being pushed, and filled it from
wells and from the port. And so, when the passages of the mine were
suddenly opened, the immense mass of water let in undermined the
supports, and all who were within were overpowered by the mass of water
and the caving in of the mine.
12. Again, when a rampart was being prepared against the wall in front
of them, and the place was heaped up with felled trees and works placed
there, by shooting at it with the ballistae red-hot iron bolts they set
the whole work on fire. And when a ram-tortoise had approached to batter
down the wall, they let down a noose, and when they had caught the ram
with it, winding it over a drum by turning a capstan, having raised the
head of the ram, they did not allow the wall to be touched, and finally
they destroyed the entire machine by glowing fire-darts and the blows of
ballistae. Thus by such victory, not by machines but in opposition to
the principle of machines, has the freedom of states been preserved by
the cunning of architects.
Such principles of machines as I could make clear, and as I thought most
serviceable for times of peace and of war, I have explained in this
book. In the nine earlier books I have dealt with single topics and
details, so that the entire work contains all the branches of
architecture, set forth in ten books.
FINIS
* * * * *
SCAMILLI IMPARES (BOOK III, ch. 4)
No passage in Vitruvius has given rise to so much discussion or
been the subject of such various interpretations as this phrase.
The most reasonable explanation of its meaning seems to be that of
Émile Burnouf, at one time Director of the French School at Athens,
published in the _Revue Générale del' Architecture_ for 1875, as a
note to a brief article of his on the explanation of the curves of
Greek Doric buildings. This explanation was accepted by Professor
Morgan, who called my attention to it in a note dated December 12,
1905. It has also quite recently been adopted by Professor Goodyear
in his interesting book on _Greek Refinements_.
Burnouf would translate it _nivelettes inégales_, "unequal
levellers." He states that in many parts of France in setting a
long course of cut stone the masons make use of a simple device
consisting of three pointed blocks of equal height used as
levellers, of which two are placed one at each extremity of the
course, while the third is used to level the stones, as they are
successively set in place, by setting it upon the stone to be set
and sighting across the other two levellers. If two "levellers" of
equal height are used with a third of less height placed at the
centre of the course, with perhaps others of intermediate height
used at intermediate points, it would obviously be equally easy to
set out a curved course, as, for instance, the curved stylobate of
the Parthenon which rises about three inches in its length of one
hundred feet. By a simple calculation any desired curve could be
laid out in this way. The word scamillus is a diminutive of
_scamnum_, a mounting-block or bench.
Practically the same explanation is given by G. Georges in a memoir
submitted to the Sorbonne in April, 1875. Georges adds an
interesting list, by no means complete, of the various explanations
that have been offered at different times.
Philander (1522-1552). Projections of the stylobate or pedestals.
Barbaro (1556-1690). The same.
Bertano (1558). Swellings of the die of the stylobate or bosses
in the stylobate or the frieze of the
entablature.
Baldus (1612). Sub-plinths placed under the bases of the columns.
Perrault (1673-1684). Projection of the stylobate.
Polleni (1739). The same.
Galiani (1758-1790). Projection of the stylobate with hypothesis of
embossments on the stylobates and the bases of
the columns.
Tardieu and Coussin (1837) and Mauffras (1847). Projection of the stylobates.
Aurès (1865). Steps or offsets between the stylobate and the columns.
The list of Georges is wholly French and Italian.
Fra Giocondo's interpretation is indicated in our reproduction of
the illustration in his edition of 1511.
Hoffer (1838) and afterwards Pennethorne (1846) and Penrose (1851)
gave measurements showing the curvatures in the Parthenon and the
temple of Theseus in Athens. Penrose and most writers who followed
him supposed the "scamilli impares" to be projections or offsets on
the stylobate required on account of the curves to bring the column
into relation with the architraves above, and similar offsets of
unequal or sloping form were supposed to be required above the
abaci of the capitals, but such offsets, although sometimes
existing, have no obvious connection with the passage in Vitruvius.
C. Bötticher (1863) and more recently Durm have denied the original
intention of the curves and ascribe them to settlement, a
supposition which hardly accords with the observed facts. Reber, in
the note on this passage in his translation of Vitruvius (1865),
thinks the scamilli were sloping offsets on the stylobate to cause
the inclination of the columns, but admits that nothing of the kind
has been found in the remains so far examined. It may be added that
this is at variance with the statement of the purpose of the
scamilli which Vitruvius gives.
Assuming, as I think we must, that the horizontal curvature of the
stylobate in such buildings as the Parthenon was intended and
carefully planned, Burnouf's explanation fits the case precisely
and makes this passage of Vitruvius straightforward and simple.
This can be said of no other explanation, for all the others leave
the passage obscure and more or less nonsensical. Durm's attempt to
refer the passage to the case of the temple with a podium which has
just been spoken of by Vitruvius is somewhat forced, or at least
unnecessary. Clearly the passage refers to stylobates in general;
but Reber also so translates and punctuates as to make the use of
the "scamilli impares" refer only to the case of temples built in
the Roman manner with the podium. His resulting explanation still
leaves the passage obscure and unsatisfactory. One may finally
refer to the ingenious but improbable explanation of Choisy, who
translates it echelons impairs, and explains them as offsets
arranged according to the odd numbers, _nombres impairs_, i. e.,
offsets varying at equal intervals in the proportion of 1, 3, 5, 7,
9, etc., and which he claims was applied also to the entasis of
columns.
H. L. WARREN.
INDEX
Abacus, 92, 106, 110, 122.
[Greek: Abaton], 56.
Abdera, 212, 269.
Acanthus pattern, origin of, 104.
Accius, 255.
Acoustics, of the site of a theatre, 153 _f._
Acroteria, 96.
Aequians have springs which produce goitre, 239.
Aeruca (verdigris), 219.
Aeschylus, 198.
Aesculapius, proper site for temple of, 15;
temple of, at Tralles, 198.
Aetna, 47.
Africa, 240.
Agatharcus, 198.
Agesistratus, 199.
Agger (river), 231.
Agnus castus (tree), 60 _f._, 296.
[Greek: Akrobatikon], 283.
Alabanda, 212;
temple of Apollo at, 78.
Alae, of house, 177;
of temples, 120.
Albula (river), 233.
Alder, 61.
Alexander, 35 _f._, 195, 310.
Alexandria, 36, 196, 197, 218;
length of shadow of gnomon at, 270.
Alexis (poet), 168.
Altars, 125 _f._
Altino, 21.
Aluminous springs, 234.
Amiternum, stone quarries of, 49.
Ammon, 235.
Amphiprostyle, 75.
Amphithalamos, 186.
Amyntas, 310.
Analemma, 257;
its applications, 270 _ff._