ON THE FUNDAMENTAL TERMS OF VITRUVIUSS ARCHITECTURAL

THEORY
Vitruvius unfolds his theory of architecture in I, 2, 1-9. In these passages he
maintains that architecture is distinguished from random building practice
through a set of principles: ordinatio, in Greek taxis, dispositio, in Greek diathesis,
eurythmia, symmetria, decor, distributio, in Greek oikonomia.1
There is, however considerable confusion surrounding these terms, and especially
ordination, eurythmia and symmetria. Vitruvius assembles terms of aesthetic
criticism, without clearly distinguishing [them] comments F. Granger.2 J.J. Pollitt
adds: [Vitruviuss] distinction between taxis and symmetria for example is hazy and
redundant.3 And P. Gros: Malgr un discourse qui se veut intgralement cohrent, il
apparat trs vite que les principes constitutifs de l art de btir, tel que cet auteur les
dfinit dans son livre I, manquent souvent de prcision et de pertinence. 4 On the
other hand, a number of scholars, just as dinstinguished as the aforementioned, have
sought to overcome the apparent incoherence in Vitruviuss theory. They, however,
propose extremely complex interpretations of the terms appearing in I, 2 and their
interraltions.5 But this is not Vitruviuss style: his language may be quite confusing,
but, usually, what he says is quite simple.
I fully agree with H. Geertmann who notes that fenomeni propri del testo devono
in primo luogo essere spiegati con l aiuto del testo stesso, 6 and this way is the way I
am going to proceed.
The confusion surrounding the fundamental terms of Vitruviuss architectural
theory results, in my opinion, from the way the Roman master uses the word
symmetria. I argue that Vitruvius attaches to it three related, but not identical
meanings: a rather general one, a strict one in accordance with the definition he gives
in I, 2, 4 and a literal one. All these meanings, however, are compatible with each
other. The threefold meaning of symmetria, the frequent reference to it in De
Architectura and the central role Vitruvius seems to have assigned to it in the
definition of ordination lead to the assumption that it has a dominating importance in
his theory of architecture.
Le principe, writes P. Gros, qui nous apparat de ce point de vue le plus riche
est celui de la symmetria. Plac en exergue ds les premires lignes du livre III, il
constitue, parmi toutes les notions abstraites manipules avec plus ou moins de
bonheur par Vitruve, le seul invariant spcifique applicable l activit archtecturale:7
and H. Knell notes : Im Zentrum steht symmetria, die auf ordinatio and quantitas
beruht, sowie disposito ermglicht.8 I do not subscribe to this view. I do not think
that the use of the word symmetria by Vitruvius implies that the author of De
Architectura meant that symmetria is or should be the principle governing
1

Vitruvius, De Architectura, I, 2, 1: Architectura autem constat ex ordinatione,

quae graece taxis dicitur, et ex dispositione, hanc autem Graeci diathesin vocitant, et
eurythmia et symmetria et decore et distributione, quae graece oeconomia dicitur=
Now architecture consists of order, which in Greek is called taxis, and of
arrangement, which the Greeks name diathesis, and of eurythmia and symmetry and
decor and distribution which in Greek is called oeconomia. All quotations of Latin
text and translations are taken from the Loeb edition, ed. and trans. F. Granger
(London 1931), unless otherwise indicated.

architecture. He never states such a thing and, in my opinion, he never lets us assume
it.
I find it hard to believe that Vitruvius referred to the concepts of which
architectura constat= architecture consists without any logical order or
assessment of their relative importance. I am not convinced that he assigned
what is regarded almost unanimously by modern scholars as the most important
component of architecture (or even its goal) that is symmetria to fourth
place. And first, as order demands, he says at the end of Book II, I will describe
the temples of the immortal gods.9 Matters are dealt with in order of priority: this is
what anyone would do who wished to address Caesar himself. Let us consider the
definitions of the terms ordination and symmetria as translated by F. Granger (Loeb,
1931), M.H. Morgan (Harvard U.P., 1914) and Ph. Fleury (Les Belles Lettres, 1990).
Ordinatio est modica membrorum operas commoditas separatism universeque
proportionis ad symmetriam comparatio. Haec componitur ex quantitate, quae
graece posotes dicitur. Quantitas autem est modulorum ex ipsius operas sumptio e
singulisque membrorum partibus universi operas conveniens effectus.
Order is the balanced adjustment of the details of the work separately, and, as to
the whole, the arrangement of the proportion with a view to a symmetrical result. This
is made up of Dimension, which in Greek is called posotes. Now Dimension is the
taking of modules from the parts of the work: and the suitable effect of the whole
work arising from the several subdivisions of the parts. (Granger)
Order gives due measure to the members of a work considered separately, and
symmetrical agreement to the proportions of the whole. It is an adjustment according
to quantity (in Greek posotes). By this I mean the selection of modules from the
members of the work itself and, starting from these individual parts of members,
constructing the whole work to correspond. (Morgan)
L ordonnance est l adaption convenable des mesures des membres de l ouvrage
pris sparment et, pour l ensemble, l tablishment de rapports aboutissant la
symtrie. Elle est constitue de la quantitas, qui se dit en grec posotes. La quantitas
est le choix de modules partir de membres de l ouvrage lui-mme et une
ralisation harmonieuse de l ensemble de l ouvrage partir des diffrents parties de
ses membres. (Fleury)
Item symmetria est ex ipsius operis membris conveniens consensus ex partibusque
separatis ad universae figurae speciem ratae partis responsus.
Symmetry also is the appropriate harmony arising out of the details of the work
itself ; the correspondence of each given detail among the separate details to the form
of the design as a whole. (Granger)
Symmetry is a proper agreement between the members of the work itself, and
relation between the different parts and the whole general scheme, in accordance with
a certain part selected as standard. (Morgan)

De mme la symtrie est l accord harmonieux des membres de l ouvrage mme et

la corrlation reposant sur une partie calcule entre les parties sparment et la
configuration de l ensemble. (Fleury)
In the definition of Ordinatio Vitruvius uses two words with similar meaning
(commoditas and modica)10 both deriving from modus, the Latin word for Greek
metron (measure). This implies that Vitruvius does not speak of a state of balance 11
between the members of a work: for this the word commoditas alone would be
sufficient.12 Vitruvius is speaking probably of a design, an action by which the
members of the work are adjusted to each other. This adjustment is described as
modica, which I understand to mean that it is carried out with a sense of metron, or
due measure. The rectus accommodatusque status is the result of the architects
work. So I suggest that the first part of the definition of ordination be understood as
follows: Order is the balanced and measured adjustment of the members of the work
considered separately.
According to the Oxford Latin Dictionary the noun ordination had the following
meanings: 1) the action of laying out in the correct relative positions, arrangement 13
2) the action of putting in order (something confused), organization, and the
ordering or regulating. And the verb ordino means: 1) to set out in order, arrange,
3) to make orderly or systematic, organize. It should be noted that Vitruvius
defines disposiito and not ordination as the putting of things in the correct relative
positions (more on this issue, below), so putting in order or arrangement seem to
be the meanings that best convey Vitruviuss use of the term ordination.
We may note that the Roman cultural environment of the late first century B.C.
favoured the understanding of the world as a well-structured and ordered whole.
Cicero concluded that thus all considerations from every viewpoint demonstrate
that everything in our world is wonderfully ordered by divine intelligence and design
for the welfare and preservation of all 14 a view not far from that of Plato who
asserted that God took over all that was visible He brought it into order
(taxis) out of disorder (ataxia), deeming the former state is in all ways better than the
latter.15 An architectural theory which favoured well-structured and ordered entities
would have been welcomed in this environment.16
A well-structured and ordered whole presumes a rank order,17 and the
establishment of this is implied in everyday language by the term setting out in
order: the noun ordo has, according to the OLD, the significance of 5) civil or
social standing, rank, position.18 I will try to demonstrate that this is also the case with
taxis, Greek for ordination, in Vitruviuss architectural theory.
Although the word taxis in everyday language had mainly the meaning or
arrangement,19 in many cases it implied a rank of order, a hierarchy.
Anaximander spoke of the order of time, which means in due time, in the
course of time.20 The order that led Pythagoras to name the universe cosmos21 was
by no means devoid of connotations of rank. The Atomists used the concept of taxis
as a means of specifying a class of differences between the atoms. Aristotle
summarized their views.22 These differences (ie. between the atoms), the say, are
shape (schema), order (taxis) and position (thesis); because they hold that what is
differs only in contour, intercontact and inclination of these contour means shape,
intercontact order, and inclination position. Thus eg. A differs from N in shape, AN
differs from NA in order, and Z from N in position. In AN, A comes first and N
follows, whereas in NA, N comes first and A follows. Even if the Atomists did not
wish to imply differences of value between AN and NA this arrangement is prone to

become loaded with connotations: in common experience what comes first is of

greater importance than that which follows.23 Platos God who brought order to the
world of visible things established a rank order, too. 24 If order implied the
presence or the establishment of a rank order in everyday language as well as in
philosophical views, why should it not be possible that Order signifies rank order in
architectural theory?
Vitruvius uses the words compare and comparatio for an array of meanings,
ranging from preparation to provision or putting together and arrange. 25
According to TTL comparatio has the significance both of praeparatio and the
Greek synkrisis (comparison) and antithesis (contradiction).26 A very accurate
translation of comparatio in English is given by the OLD: 1) preparation, making
ready, 4) combination, conjunction, 5) arrangement, settlement, but also 1)
comparison or weighing of the relative merits or other values 3) relationship (of
position).27
In my opinion comparatio in the definition of ordination should be understood as
carrying both meanings, that is arrangement containing an element of comparison,
or arrangement according to relative importance, arrangement according to an
evaluation, in other words creation of a hierarchy, establishment of rank order,
or, if Vitruvius attributed a less active character to it, simply hierarchy, rank
order. It is legitimate to assume that Vitruvius is using comparatio here in this very
specific meaning? Although comparatio in no other passage of De Architectura has a
meaning related to comparison, I consider this assumption to be legitimate: when a
word is used as term of an architectural theory, it may have a very specific meaning,
as long as this meaning does not contradict the meaning this word has in everyday
language.
On the other hand proportion can safely be understood as the relation of
magnitudes, in this case of the members of the work. The definition of proportion
given in De Architectura III, 1, 1 does not contradict this basic meaning: it rather
focuses on the demand for a common measure just as quantitas does. More on
proportion, later. For the moment it is worth noting that proportionis occurs in the
definition of ordination in the genitive singular. Why does Vitruvius not speak of
proportions in the plural? Although our author is not very consistent in his use of
grammatical number, I believe that in the present case we are dealing with a conscious
choice on his part. He speaks of the relation (in the singular) of magnitudes (of the
members) characteristic of the overall work: the relation (sing.) of magnitudes by
which the entire work is structured.28
So comparatio proportionis could mean the creation of a hierarchy of
magnitudes (of the members of the work). But even if we suppose that comparatio
means simply arrangement it is the force of the genitive singular proportionis that
leads to a similar interpretation: comparatio proportionis signifies the arrangement of
the relation (not the relations) of magnitudes, or the attribution of (the proper) relative
magnitudes (to the members of the work), whose purpose is to achieve symmetria
(proportionis ad symmetriam comparatio).
But what is meant by ad symmetriam? This is the point that causes what I regard to
be a major misunderstanding 29 and it is Vitruviuss language which is misleading. I
suggest that Vitruvius is here using the word symmetria in its literal meaning, that
is a meaning related but not identical to the meaning it has in the definition given in I,
2, 4.
Symmetry, symmetria, implies that the elements of which the work is composed
have a common measure by which they can be compared with each other. Let us

recall the basic definition of symmetrical magnitudes as given by Euclid. 30

Symmetrical magnitudes are those than can be measured by a common measure, and
asymmetrical magnitudes are those for which no common measure can by found. In
a broad, but still literal, sense two asymmetrical magnitudes cannot be compared
to each other, insofar as no common measure exists, by which the comparison can
be carried out. In a narrow sense, they can be compared, because a mathematical
order of magnitudes can be established.31 But even in this case, if there is a common
measure, then the comparison becomes more apparent, more tangible, more
obvious it becomes an object of aesthetics. Furthermore, I have the feeling that
symmetria in this context has the meaning it has in Philebos 25E and 64Eff: the
incorporation of the metron in order to make two opposite things, two opposite
concepts symphona, that is congruous, to fit to each other.32 Ad symmetriam then
means: (articulation of the work according to a rank order, a hierarchy) striving
to keep the members of the work comparable to each other, to keep the metron in
the overall work.
De Architectura was written at a time, when hierarchy in social life resulted in
huge differences in social status and in everyday life. By what means was the life and
social status of imperator Caesar33 comparable to that of a slave? Any rank order
tends to the asymmetrical in this sense. In architecture, one element may
overshadow all the others, and render them unimportant, or irrelevant. This is what
Vitruvius fears, and this is the danger about which he is trying to warn us. I therefore
suggest that ordination should not be understood as an arrangement of the proportion
with a view to a symmetrical result which places Order at the service of
Symmetria but rather as:
Order is the balanced and measured adjustment of the members of the work
considered separately, and the creation of an hierarchy of magnitudes, to keep
symmetry in the overall work, or, if we do not make use of the word hierarchy:
Order is the balanced and measured adjustment of the members of the work
considered separately, and the establishment of such a relation of magnitudes, that
symmetry is kept in the overall work.
In this context it makes perfect sense that haec (ie. Ordination)34 componitur ex
quantitate= Order is composed of Quantity, which I understand as: Order is
shaped through Quantity. The hierarchy is created when the appropriate relative
magnitude is attributed to each and every single member of the work.
Let me also suggest that Aristotles concept of taxis in Rhetoric 1414a ff.
implies the attribution of right position and right length (that is the right
magnitude) to the parts of a speech.35 It is not inconceivable that this understanding
of taxis evolved in architectural theory into two separate notions: ordination,
concerning the quantitative aspects the dimensions of the members and
dispositio, concerning the spatial aspects the positions of the members of a
work; more on dispositio, later.36
Quantitas is the selection of modules from the work itself. I understand this to
mean: Quantity is the establishment of a common measure; this common measure
should be selected from the members of the work. This obviously is intended to help
bring about the coherence of a well-structured whole. Quantity is also the e singulis
membrorum partibus universi operas conveniens effectus. In my opinion, effectus
has the meaning of realization or construction. 37 Conveniens38 which mainly
means compatible, and consequently harmonious and suitable, probably has here the

meaning of harmonious. Conveniens effectus is the harmonious construction of the

work, the construction of the whole in a way to make it harmonious.
The harmonious character of the work derives from the proper, suitable
determination of the basic relative magnitudes of the members and their parts,
according to their importance, to their rank. The analogy with the harmony of the
world lies, in my understanding of Vitruvius, in selecting the basic relationship
between the magnitudes of the parts in such a way as to create an hierarchically
structured whole; this task can not be carried out by symmetria as defined in I, 2, 4.
The analogy with the harmony of the world can not simply be based on the dozens of
architectural relations that are inevitably to be found in a building and which are
related to symmetria: symmetria is the conveniens consensus, the harmonious
agreement between the members and between each member and the whole.
Symmetry, consensus, in my opinion, describes a compatibility of the elements
composing a work, based on common measure. This is, in my understanding, the
difference between quantitas and symmetria. Both result in harmony, but through
different paths; I can not imagine Vitruvius confusing two concepts outlined in the
same chapter of his own treatise.
I, therefore, subscribe to the first part of Ph. Fleurys aphorism,39 that la quantitas
pour Vitruve est la dtermination du combine grand, but not to its second part :
c est l action de dfinir la symmetria pour un btiment donn . This view leads
to total chaos concerning the meaning of the notions quantitas and symmetria.
Ordinatio, not symmetria is obviously meant in I, 2, 2, in the sentence following the
definition of ordination: haec componitur ex quantitate. Order, not Symmetry is
composed of Quantity. So, I translate:
Order is made up of Quantity which in Greek is called Posotes. Quantity is the
selection of modules from the work itself and, starting from the individual parts
of members, the construction of a harmonious whole.
The concept of proportio seems to complicate matters, and requires further
consideration. Let us compare the way the term is used in De Architectura III, 1, 1:
Aedium composition constat ex symmetria, cuius rationem diligentissime architecti
tenere debent. Ea autem paritur a proportione, quae graece analogia dicitur.
Proportio est ratae parties membrorum in omni opera totiusque commodulato, ex qua
ratio efficitur symmetriarum. Namque non potest aedis ulla sine symmetria atque
proportione rationem habere compositionis.
The design of a temple depends on symmetry, the principles of which must be most
carefully observed by the architect. They are due to Proportion, in Greek analogia.
Proportion is a correspondence among the measures of the members of an entire
work, and of the whole to a certain part selected as standard. From this symmetry
results. Without Symmetry and Proportion there can be no Reason in the design of
any temple.40
I would suggest that Vitruviuss proportion corresponds closely to the
definition of symmetria given by Euclid. Proportion is simply the arithmetical
relations existing in a work, the relations between magnitudes, which are formed on
the basis of a module. When these are such that we have consensus, when we have
symmetria, and only then do we have Reason in temple building, or if ratio is

intended in a less specific sense, only then do we have a proper plan in temple
building. Proportion is the simple commensurability (commodulatio), whereas
symmetria possesses a qualitative aspect. This Symmetry possesses something in the
mean and the blending of things opposed to each other described by Plato in the
Philebos 64Eff. I take issue with Pierre Gross, who writes: Vitruve fournit une
traduction satisfaisante (of symmetria) avec le terme commodulatio, dsigne
effectivement la commensurabilit de toutes les composantes s une vre complexe
fonde sur le recours une unit modulaire. 41 This is only partly true, for Vitruvius
clearly states in the above-mentioned passage that proportion, not symmetria, is:
ratae parties membrorum in omni opera totiusque commodulatio.
Symmetria, that is consensus, is found primarily in the arithmetical relationships
observed in the human body a topic discussed by Vitruvius in III,k 1, 2-3. This
whole passage can be understood as an answer to the question: when can we say that a
set of arithmetical relations is congruous, so that it results in a concensus? The answer
given is: when the arithmetical relations are similar to those found in the human
body, for Vitruvius says that, the other limbs (of the human body) also have their
proportionate measurements In like fashion the members of the temples ought to
have dimensions of their several parts corresponding by a common measure to the
general sum of their whole magnitude. 42 It goes without saying that not only
symmetria, but also taxis, is inherent in the human body, for it is a clear, wellstructured whole.
Vitruvius refers often to the symmetry of a building. I suggest that this
symmetry is a general way of speaking of the proportion and of the relation of
magnitudes in a building P. Gross probably has those cases in mind when he
identifies commodulatio with symmetria. Vitruvius speaks of the symmetries of Doric
doors in IV, 6, 1 and of the symmetries of columns in IV, 8, 2; symmetry appears
along with proportion in IV, 8, 3 and we have buildings laid out with other
symmetries in IV, 8, 4, all passages in which this generic meaning of symmetria fits
best. On the other hand passages in which symmetria is to be understood as having the
meaning Vitruvius attaches to it in the definition given in I, 2, 4, I can only see here
the author telling us how to achieve consensus, or how Symmetry should be achieved
in certain building types. He does not necessarily imply that Symmetry must be our
major objective when designing a building. We should remember how Vitruvius
concludes his reference to the symmetry of the human body in III, 1, 9:
Ergo si convenit ex articulis hominis numerum inventum esse relinquitur, ut
suscipiamus eos, qui etiam aedes deorum inmortalium constituentes ita membra
operum ordinaverunt, ut proportionibus et symmetriis separatae atque universae
convenientes que efficerentur eorum distributiones.
Therefore, if it is agreed that number is found from the articulation of the human
body it remains that we take up those who in planning the temples of the immortal
gods have so fixed the rank order of the members of the work (they have attributed
the appropriate relative magnitudes to the members of the work), that by the help of
proportion and symmetry their several and general distributions are rendered
congruous.43
This reading understands ordino as having a meaning similar to that of ordination,
that is the establishment of a rank order, which is realized by the attribution of the
appropriate magnitude to the members of the work. Once more Symmetry is

subordinate to Order, not vice-versa. Its function is to render congruous a setting

outlined by Order.
I would suggest that Order in this sense is one of the main issues of the De
Architectura, although its author explicitly refers to it only in a few passages. He
describes various buildings and their structural parts without saying this is how the
proper Order will be achieved. Such is the case with distributio and dispositio too.
But it should be noted that by prescribing the proportions of the members Vitruvious
prescribes their relative magnitudes, and by that their rank order, even if this is not
made explicit to the reader. When, for example, he describes the peripteral temple as
one which has 6 by 11 columns he speaks of Order: the relation of magnitudes
between the columns and the pediments is, more or less, set. 44 And in his accounts of
the three architectural orders a major step is taken towards the attribution of the
proper relative magnitudes, and bestowing the proper Order on the building itself.
Here the passage in IV, praef., 2 is relevant:
Ex tribus generibus quae subtilissimas haberent proportionibus modulorum
quantitates ionici generic moribus docui.
Of the three orders which, through proportional magnitudes, furnish the most
subtle Quantities, I have set forth the Ionic order as it has been formed by tradition. 45
Vitruvius summarizes his treatment of the Ionic order through the concept of
Quantity, which is a component of ordination, not through that of symmetria. I
understand the property of Order to be inherent not only to the Ionic, but also to the
Doric and the Corinthian orders. The column shafts have an appropriate magnitude in
relation to their capitals, the architrave to the column capitals, the pediment to the
architrave.
Turning now to consider the definition of the term dispositio. If ordinatio is
realized by the attribution of the appropriate magnitude to the members of the work,
dispositio, it seems, assigns the members of the work to their appropriate relative
position:
Dispositio autem est rerum apta conlocatio elegansque compositionibus effectus
operis cum qualitate.46
This has been variously translated as follows:
Arrangement, however, is the fit assemblage of details, and, arising from this
assemblage, the elegant effect of the work and its dimensions, along with a certain
quality of character. (Granger)
Arrangement includes the putting of things in their proper places and the elegance
of effect that is due to adjustments appropriate to the character of the work. (Morgan)
La disposition est la mise en place correcte des lements et, grce ces
arrangements, la ralisation legante d un ouvrage o apparat la gualit. (Fleury)
Quality, is intended, in my view, in a Stoic sense. 47 Poiotes, the Greek for
qualitas, was the second category of Stoic ontological definition, which made

the substratum, the shapeless and unidentifiable matter, a specific object. 48

Understood thus, qualitas in this passage becomes equivalent to what we mean
today by identity.
Such a reading of qualitas is matched by an interpretation of elegans as
particular or outstanding (praestans, egregious).49 As already noted effectus
therefore has the meaning of realization. Elegans effectus is the process of choosing
the appropriate elements and appointing them to the appropriate place. It is the action
by which a building is born out of the chaos of raw material in disorder. It is the
shaping of a building out of a random juxtaposition of architectural elements. It is the
articulation of a spatially ordered whole.50
The articulation is carried out through the composition of the members.
Compositionibus appears in the plural. Although, as already noted, Vitruvius is not
very consistent in his use of grammatical number, I believe that in this case h is
referring to a single building. So by compositionibus I understand composite
assemblage, assemblage of the members in such a way as to make them belong to
many entities at the same time: A column must be considered as a member of a
colonnade, but as a member of the column/architrave/pediment entity as well.
Elegans and effectus encompass compositionibus and become inherently linked.
The interpretations proposed for elegans and qualitas may explain why these two
words appear in what would otherwise be the least expected place: in the definition of
dispositio rather than that of eurythmia or symmetria.
In sum, I suggest the following translation for the definition of dispositio:
Arrangement is the proper placement of architectural elements and, through
their composite assemblage, the shaping of the works identity.
It makes perfect sense that the sentence following this definition reads:species
dispositionis sunt hae: ichnographia, orthographia, scaenographia. I understand
this to mean: Arrangement is apparent through ground-plan, elevation and
perspective.51 Dispositio becomes manifest through these three ways of depicting
the work to be that is by the right placement of the elements of a work in a wellstructured whole.52 The neat arrangement of various rooms round the peristyle of a
palaestra53 is to be seen in the ground plan (Greek ichnographia); the elegant
distribution of columns and antae in a stage wall54 is to be seen in the elevation
(Greek orthographia); the pleasing arrangement of a T-shaped basilica room 55 is to be
seen in the perspective (Greek scaenographia).56 Both ichnographia and
orthographia must be carried out modice, which in my understanding, means, here
too, with due measure (Granger: competent, Morgan:: proper, Fleury: l
chelle).
Le me now offer some remarks on Vitruvius definition of eurythmia, the third in
sequence of the terms mentioned in I, 2, coming just before that of symmetria.
Eurythmia est venusta species commodusque in conpositionibus membrorum
aspectus. Haec efficitur, cum membra operis convenientia sunt altitudinis ad
latitudinem, latitudinis ad longitudinem, et ad summam omnia respondent suae
symmetriae.
Proportion implies a graceful semblance; the suitable display of details in their
context. This is attained when the details of the work are of a height suitable to their

breadth, of a breadth suitable to their length; in a word, when everything has a

symmetrical correspondence. (Granger)
Eurythmy is beauty and fitness in the adjustments of the members. This is found
when the members of a work are of a height suitable to their breadth, of a breadth
suited to their length and in a word, when they all correspond summetrically.
(Morgan)
L eurythmie est l apparence gracieuse et l aspect bien proportionn que rside
dans la composition des membres. Elle se ralise quand les membres de l ouvrage ont
une hauter en rapport avec la largeur, une largeur en rapport avec la longueur, et au
total quand toutes les parties correspondent la symtrie que leur a t fix. (Fleury)
The meaning of the word eurythmia in the Classical tradition has been discussed
exhaustively. H. Brunn claimed there was in eurythmia a Milderung of symmetria.57
For C.Watzinger it represented the visual effect of dispositio,58 and for F. Schlikker
the gracefulness of a work.59 The major issue remains the real meaning of
rhythmos: is it shape or form, or rhythm in the modern sense of the word
that is, does eurythmia mean the quality of being well shaped, well formed, as J.J.
Pollitt60 puts it, or having a pleasant rhythm, or rhythmical movement. Ancient
sources indicate the former interpretation as more probable, without excluding,
however, the latter: E. Petersen made a major contribution on this issue showing that
thythmoi were the positions of the body during the dance.61
Eurythmia is in the first instance, for Vitruvius, venusta species: as mentioned
above, species has the meaning of visual appearance, form and shape. Venusta
species can probably be identified with the attribution of the quality of being well
shaped to the members of a work. If I have it right, Vitruvius assigns appearance to
third place, after magnitude and position: the members should have the right
magnitude, the right position, and a pleasing appearance.
Vitruvius does not speak of each single member; eurythmia resides in
compositionibus membrorum, that is what we have called the composite
assemblage of the members.62 This is underlined by the second term needed to be
fulfilled in order for eurythmia to be achieved: commodus aspectus, the balanced
appearance, the fitting aspect of the members. So I translate the essential definition
as:
Eurythmy is a beautiful aspect and a balanced appearance of the members in
their composite assemblage.
In order for a work to be distinguished by Eurythmy its members should have a
pleasing appearance when perceived as parts of a group; they should possess the
quality of being well-shaped as constituents of a set. Vitruvius asks: Has a column the
appropriate entasis in order to look strong enough to hold the entablature and the
pediment? Are the columns thick enough for the colonnade to have a balanced
appearance? He does not ask: Is the column beautiful per se? In this context both
notions of eurythmia apply: for a set of related objects to have a beautiful aspect
and a balanced appearance almost means that they are to be distinguished by a
pleasant rhythm.

Eurythmia efficitur cum= Eurythmy is achieved when, I understand: The

pre-requisite of eurythmia is, or:
This is achieved, when the members of the work are of a height suitable to their
breadth, of a breadth suitable to their length; an in a word, when they all correspond
symmetrically.
Symmetros est eurythmiae qualitas points out Vitruvius in I, 2, 4, which I
understand as follows: In order for eurythmia to be achieved, and in order for the
members to have a pleasing appearance when perceived as parts of composite
assemblages, those members should be symmetrical. In other words there must be a
harmonious agreement between the members of the work based on the adoption of a
common measure. Symmetry serves Eurythmia, just as it serves Order.
We are faced with the task of establishing objective criteria in a field dominated
by taste, i.e. subjectivism. It is obvious that Vitruvius, a Roman military engineer,
does not feel familiar enough with a so-called artistic approach to Architecture. He
tries to determine rationally how a pleasing appearance is produced and he introduces
the notion of sets of members, for which the laws resulting in the beauty of a set of
objects may be clearly described; this is not the case with the laws resulting in the
beauty of a single object. So, Vitruviuss eurythmia seems to depend rather on
reason, than on impulses.
Let us consider Vitruviuss arguments for the need for refinements (or optical
corrections), in III, 3, 11 and IV, 4, 3. He writes in III, 3, 11: The angle columns also
must be made thicker by the fiftieth part of their diameter, because they are cut into by
the air and appear more slender to the spectator. 63 Here we can discern the theory,
according to which vision is based on emanations (aporroai) of the objects that we
see (just like something we smell). The corner columns, being more exposed to the air
than the others, are subject to greater losses of emanations, and therefore appear
thinner than the others. In developing his argument, Vitruvius does not have recourse
to observations relating to the psychology of the observer. He bases the need for
refinements of objective laws of nature.
It is in the sphere of optical corrections that we have one of the few ancient
references to eurythmia as a concept relating to architecture. 64 The reference is by
Philo Mech (4, 4) who notes that (members) of equal thickness and constructed
perpendicular appeared to be of unequal thickness and not perpendicular because
the eyes deceive us So, by a process of trial and error, adding to masses and again
subtracting from them, and establishing tapers and trying out every possible means,
architectural forms are produced which are suited to the vision and appear eurythma.65
Although his goal is similar to Vitruvius (viz. the production of well-shaped forms),
Philo seems to place emphasis on the psychological element, the subjective
element since he does not give any scientific explanation of these phenomena to
the detriment of the objective.
A modicum of subjectivity may be felt in Vitruviuss reference to eurythmia in VI,
2, 5 and only there where he urges the architect to adjust the symmetries of private
buildings. The adjustments, however, aim at fitting the buildings into the given sites;
they should result in proportionis ad decorum apparatio, that is they must be made
with regard to appropriateness of proportion. In other words, they must be justified
and obey commonly held aesthetic and social conventions. So, I cannot fully
subscribe to J. J. Pollitts view that Vitruviuss eurythmia was a pleasing quality
which arose from the alteration and adjustment of concrete forms and it was
something which had to be understood subjectively, than demonstrated objectively. 66

On the contrary, I feel that Vitruvius, against the current of his time, wanted
architecture to serve the Beautiful only when this necessarily implied that it also
served Reason.
The important role of Eurythmy in Vitruviuss architectural theory is, in my view,
well established. We should bear in mind the definition of eurythmia, if we want to
understand the definition of symmetria without loading it with meanings the Roman
architect never intended. Morgans translation is excellent; nevertheless I would
substitute harmonious for proper in order to emphasize the concept of
conveniens consensus. 67
Symmetry is a harmonious agreement between the members of the work itself and
relation between the different parts and the whole general scheme, in accordance with
a certain part selected as standard.
On the concept and definition of decor there is little that needs to be said. As J. J.
Pollitt puts it: As applied to architecture by Vitruvius, decor is the principle by which
one judges whether the form of a building is appropriate to its function and location
and whether the details of the building are appropriate to its total form.68
Decor autem est emendatus operis aspectus probates rebus conpositi cum
auctoritate. Is perficitur statione, quod graece thematismo dicitur, seu consuetudine
aut natura.
Dcor demands the faultless ensemble of a work composed, in accordance with
precedent, of approved details. It obeys convention, which in Greek is called
thematismos, or custom or nature. (Granger)
Propriety is that perfection of style which comes when a work is authoritatively
constructed on approved principles. It arises from prescription (Greek thematismo),
from usage, or from nature. (Morgan)
La convenance est l aspect soign d un ouvrage ralis avec qualit au moyen d
lments prouvs. On l obtient en suivant une rgle, qui se dit en grec thematismo, l
habitude ou la nature. (Fleury)
Elaborating on decor which perficitur statione Vitruvius tries to show that there
is direct correspondence between the gods and architectural orders; this is the only
manifestation of decor realized by statione. I interpret statione as: by taking into
account the status of a person or of a God.69 I do not understand the term as
following some rules or prescriptions but the acknowledgement of somebeings
unchallenged status and the response to it. I suggest as a translation:
Propriety is the faultless appearance of a building composed of approved elements
on established principles. It arises when account is taken of status in Greek
thematismos, custom and nature.
The concept of distributio, the sixth and last term mentioned by Vitruvius, is the
least contentious, dealing as it does with economical use of site and materials and
effective and reasonable cost management.

Distributio autem est copiarum locique commode dispensation parcaque in

operibus sumptus ratione temperatio.
Distribution or Economy, however, is the suitable disposal of supplies and the site,
and the thrifty and wise control of expense in the works. (Granger)
Economy denotes the proper management of materials and site, as well as a thrifty
balancing of cost and common sense in the construction of the works. (Morgan)
La distribution est la rpartition convenable des resources et du terrain et, dans les
ouvrages, un sage quilibre des dpenses grce au calcul. (Fleury)
To sum up : Architectura constat ex ordinatione Architecture consists of Order
and not, as C. Faventinus claims, architecturae partes sunt (the parts of architecture
are). What transforms simple building practice into architecture is ordination,
dispositio, eurythmia, symmetria, decor and distributio.
Ordinatio, Order, is the first principle mentioned by Vitruvius, so we may
conclude that it is regarded as the most important one. Its objective is the
creation of a hierarchy, the establishment of a rank order among the elements
constituting the work, by attributing the proper magnitude to each one of them.
This attribution is called posotes, Quantity. Dispositio, Arrangement, is the
second principle mentioned. It deals with the right placement of the elements,
their right grouping, by which the work acquires its unique identity. It is
apparent in the ground-plan, in elevations, in perspectival views. Eurythmia,
Eurythmy is the third principle; it is the attribution of the quality of being well
formed to each one of the members, in such a way that the members may be
perceived as forming groups distinguished by balanced appearance. Symmetria,
the fourth principle, describes the internal harmony of the work, achieved when
there is consensus between members formed on the basis of a module, and
between members and the whole, that is when the proportions are congruous.
Decor, the fifth principle, deals with the appropriate articulation, the
authoritative construction of the work on principles respecting religion, nature
and social conventions. Distributio, finally, aims at achieving the best result with
the means one has at ones disposal.
So, according to my argument, although the components of architecture are
equal in value from one point of view, the order in which they are mentioned is not
fortuitous. In the designing of technical works, Vitruvius places greatest emphasis on
Reason in general, and secondarily on proportions, or arithmetical relations. I believe
that it is in Order that pure Reason, free of all material constraints, is primarily
manifested: rank order is the cornerstone of well-structured wholes, governed by
Reason. Dispositio, the arrangement of the elements of the work, depends to a great
extent on Reason, too, since it is closely related to the constitution of well-structured
entities. Eurythmia, since it involves sets of elements, is close enough to pure Reason,
since well-structured entities are by definition beautiful. Symmetria is distinct from
pure Reason, since it depends on the notion of consensus applied to mathematical
relations of purely technical character. Decor is much more dependent on practical
constraints, than on pure Reason, since it is the proper articulation of the work,
which takes into account natural, social and historical factors. At the bottom of the
scale is Distributio, which is no more than a reasonable economic response to
Necessity.

Let us conclude with the proposed translation for all six definitions given by
Vitruvius:
Order is the balanced and measured adjustment of the members of the work
considered separately, and the creation of a hierarchy of magnitudes, to keep
symmetry in the overall work. Order is made up of Quantity, which in Greek is
called Posotes. Quantity is the selection of modules from the members of the
work itself and, starting from the individual parts of members, the construction
of a harmonious whole.
Arrangement is the proper placement of architectural elements and, through
their composite assemblage, the shaping of the works identity. Arrangement is
apparent through ground plan, elevation and perspective.
Eurythmy is a beautiful aspect and a balanced appearance of the members in
their composite assemblage. This is achieved, when the members of the work are
of a height suitable to their breadth, of a breadth suitable to their length; and in
a work, when they all correspond symmetrically.
Symmetry is a harmonious agreement between the members of the work itself
and relation between the different parts and the whole general scheme, in
accordance with a certain part selected as standard.
Propriety is the faultless appearance of a building composed of approved
elements on established principles. It arises when account is taken of status in
Greek thematismos custom and nature.
Economy is the suitable disposal of supplies and the site, and the thrifty and
wise control of expense in the works.
Vitruvius created a properly constituted, clearly articulated system of values that
needed to be present in a technical work for it to cross the borders from handicraft,
from techne in the ancient sense of the word, to become Architecture.
NOTES
1
Vitruvius, De Architectura, I, 2, 1: Architectura autem constat ex ordinatione,
quae graece taxis dicitur, et ex dispositione, hanc autem Graeci diathesin vocitant, et
eurythmia et symmetria et decore et distributione, quae graece oeconomia dicitur=
Now architecture consists of order, which in Greek is called taxis, and of
arrangement, which the Greeks name diathesis, and of eurythmia and symmetry and
decor and distribution which in Greek is called oeconomia. All quotations of Latin
text and translations are taken from the Loeb edition, ed. and trans. F. Granger
(London 1931), unless otherwise indicated.
2
Vitruvius, De Architectura, Loeb edn. Vol. 1, 24, n. 1.
3
J.J. Pollitt, The Ancient view of Greek Art (New Haven and London 1974) 67.
4
P. Gros, Les fondements philosophiques de l harmonie architecturale selon
Vitruve, JTLA 14 (1989) 13ff.
5
E.G., J. A. Jolles, Vitruvs Aesthetik, Ph. D.Thesis (Freiburg 1905), C.Watzinger,
Vitruvstudien, RhM 64 (1919), 202 ff., F. Schlikker, Hellenistische Vorstellungen
von der Schnheit des Bauwerk nach Vitruv, Ph.D. thesis (Berlin 1940) 70ff., R. L.
Scranton, Vitruvius Arts of Architecture, Hesperia 43 (1974) 494 ff., E. Frzouls,
Vitruve et le dessin d architecture, Le dessin d architecture dans les socits
antiques. Actes du colloque de Strasbourg, 26-28. 1. 1984 (Strasbourg 1985) 213 ff.,
H. Knell, Vitruvs Architekturtheorie. Versuch einer Interpretation (Darmstadt 1985).

H. Geertmann, Teoria e attualit della progettistica architettonica di Vitruvio,

Le projet de Vitruve (Roma 1994) 7ff.
7
Gros, loc. cit. (n. 4 above).
8
H. Knell, Vitruvs Architekturtheorie (n. 5 above) 34.
9
Vitruvius, De Architectura, II, 10, 3: Et primum de deorum immortalium
aedibus sacris et de earum symmetriis et propotionibus, uti ordo postulat, insequenti
perscribam.
10
According to the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae, commoditas has the significance of
rectus accommodatusque status alicuius rei. TLL quotes Vitruriuss definition of
Order. Again, modica has the significance of Greek metrion; mediocrus, temperatus,
conveniens are its synonyms. C. Fensterbusch, Zehn Bcher ber Architektur
(Karlsrhue 1964) n. 42, identifies commoditas with the Greek symmetria. P. Gros,
Introduction to book III, Les Belles Lettres, p. XXX, concludes that
commoditas/commodulatio and proportio are the equivalents of approximations of
symmetria.
11
I agree with F. Granger in understanding commoditas as implying the notion of
balance, and specifically as balanced adjustment.
12
Most scholars agree on the active character of commoditas in the definition of
ordination. So Granger understands balanced adjustment and Morgan gives the
measure.
13
OLD lists the reference to Vitruvius definition of ordination in I, 2, 1 under this
meaning.
14
Cicero N.D. II, 132: sic undique omni ratione concluditur mente consilioque
divino omnia in hoc mundo ad salutem omnium conservationemque admirabiliter
administrari (ed. H. Rackham, Loeb 1933). Vitruvius was a great admirer of Cicero,
see De Architectura IX, praef., 17.
15
Plato, Timaeus, 30A (trans. R. G. Bury, Loeb 1929).
16
Aristotle introduced the concept of art imitating nature, a concept which has
retained its validity ever since. Vitruvius urges us to respect nature and to learn from
nature, and sees in good architecture an imitation in a broad sense of nature, eg. In
II, 1, 6; III, 1, 9; V, 2, 2. If nature is ordered, so should edifices be. This attitude is
obviously influenced by Stoic philosophy, too. By according to nature (Greek kata
physin) the Stoics connoted a well-structured order of values, see SVF III, 140-146.
Also Cicero De Fin. III, 20: selection tum ad extremum xonstans
consentaneaque naturae, in qua primum inesse incipit et intellegi quid sit quod vere
bonum posit dici= finally, choice fully nationalized and in harmony with nature; it
is at this final stage that the Good properly so called first emerges and comes to be
understood in its true nature (ed. & trans. H. Rackham, Loeb 1914).
17
The image of the world as a whole structured according to a strict rank order is
vividly expressed in Ciceros N.D.; cf. also the pyramis bonorum in. Cic. De Fin. III,
20-23.
18
OLD lists among others the reference to Cic. De Off., I, 151 under this meaning.
19
See LSJ, sv. Taxis.
20
Diels, Vors. 2, 1, 15.
21
Diels, Vors. 4, 21, 15 quotes Aetius in wiritng: Pythagoras named the universe
cosmon because of the order prevailing. The word cosmos means initially a well
ordered entity, eg. Troops, hair, etc., see LSJ, sv. kosmos.
22
Arist. Metaph., 985 b. I quote this passage as translated by H. Trendennick (Loeb
1933), except for taxis which I translate as order instead of Trendennicks
arrangement.

23

For the rank order associated with the concept of Greek protos and Latin primus
see LSJ and OLD, respectively.
24
Cf. the aforementioned passage, Timaeus 30A (above, n. 15). Platos cosmos is
an ordered whole; rank order is present everywhere in Platos world, in nature as well
as in society; eg. first (in rank) and as elder among the gods, the earth was
created (Timaeus 40C).
25
In I, 5, 8 it means the putting together of various materials: ex his
comparationibus perfectus habeatur murus. In II, 7, 1, provision: eximuntur
copiae (of stones) et comparantur. In II, 7, 3, composition of a material: ita spissis
comparationibus solidata. In V, 6, 1 spatial arrangement: comparationes basilicarum.
26
TLL lists the reference to De Architectura I, 2, 1 under comparison and
contradiction.
27
OLD lists the reference to Cic. N.D. II, 51 under relationship of position:
cum solis et lunae et quinque errantium ad eandem inter se comparationem
confectis= when the sun, the moon and five planets have returned to the same
position relative to one another.
28
Cf. M. H. Morgans translation: Order gives the due measure.
29
Scholars unanimously agree that the purpose of ordination is to achieve
symmetria in the sense symmetria is meant by Vitruvius in the definition given in I, 2,
4. Even H. Geertmann, who denies symmetrys central role asks himself: perch
questa operazione della ordination?, and he replies: per ottenere in un edificio, dice
Vitruvio, la situazione o propriet della symmetria, Teoria e attualita (see n. 6
above).
30
Euclid, Elements 10, definition 1.
31
v2 is of lesser magnitude than 2, although 2 is not x (x being a natural number)
times v2.
32
The class of the equal and double and everything which puts an end to the
differences between opposites and makes them commensurable (symmetra) and
harmonious (symphona) by the introduction of number (Plato, Philebos 25E),
metriotes and symmetria are everywhere identified with beauty and virtue (Plato,
Philebos 64E, trans. H. N. Fowler, Loeb 1925).
33
Vitruvius, De Architectura I, 1, 1, for the dedication of the treatise to imperator
Caesar.
34
From a grammatical point of view it is not clear whether haec refers to
ordination or symmetria, but the structure of this passage suggests to me that haec is
substituted for the word at the beginning of the preceding sentence, that is ordination,
not the word at the end of the preceding sentence, that is symmetria. In the latter case
Vitruvius would probably have added a word, eg. Item, as he does a couple of
sentences later, in I, 2, 4: item symmetria est.
35
Quite a few scholars have pointed to the relationship between architecture (and
especially Order) and rhetoric, among them P. Gros in his comments of Vitruvius
book III, where he gives extensive bibliography on this subject. Geertmann, Teoria e
attualita (n. 6 above), noted: Egli comincia con la ordination, la taxis, base di
tutto anche nella retorica. See also L. Callebat, Rhtorique et architecture dans le
de Architectura de Vitruve, Le projet de Vitruve (Roma 1994) 31ff.
36
In this context Ciceros use, in N.D. II, 51, of the word comparatio to signify the
relationship of position reveals similarities to Vitruviuss use of comparatio in the
definition of ordination.
37
According to OLD effectus has the meaning of 1) the making, creation (of
something organic), 2) the carrying out (of a purpose, task etc.), 3) that which is

achieved. In this case meaning 1) or 2) probably fits best. In any case, the effect is
the result of the architects work. Granger understands effectus as effect, Fleury and
Ferri (Vitruvio (dai libri I-VIII), recensione del testo, traduzione e note, Roma 1960)
as execution or realization, Morgan as effect (in the definition of dispositio)
and construction (in the definition of Quantity).
38
The Greek equivalent of con-venio is probably syn-baino, which among others
means to be compatible, to agree, see LSJ, cv. symbainein.
39
Note 2. 2. 2 of book I.
40
Translation up to standard by M. H. Morgan. Granger translates the last
sentence: for without symmetry and proportion no temple can have a regular plan.
41
P. Gros, loc. Cit. (above, n. 4).
42
Vitruvius, De Architectura III, 1, 2-3: reliqua quoque membra suas habent
commensus proportiones similiter vero sacrarum aedium membra ad universam
totius magnitudinis summam ex paribus singulis convenientissimum debent habere
commensus responsum.
43
F. Granger translates : Therefore, if it is agreed that number is found from the
articulation of the body it remains that we take up those who in planning the
temples so ordained the parts of the work that, by the help of proportion and
symmetry, their several and general distribution is rendered congruous.
44
Vitruvius, De Architectura III, 2, 5: The peripteral will be that which shall have
six columns in the front and six at the back, and on either side eleven, counting in the
angle columns.
45
This is my translation of this passage. It is not clear whether we should translate
together proportionibus modularum or modularum quantitates.The word modulus is
often used by Vitruvius in a generic way to indicate the dimensions of a building, so
De Architectura, IV, 1, 8: subtilitateque iudiciorum progressi et gracilioribus
modulis delectati septem crassitudinis diametros con-stituerunt= having made
progress in refinement and delicacy of feeling, and finding pleasure in more slender
pro-portions, they have established seven diameters (trans. M. H. Morgan); III, 5,
9: oculi species incertam modul-orum renuntiat sensibus quantitatem= the eye
conveys to the mind only a confused estimate of the dimensions (trans. M. H.
Morgan). So what is meant here is either proportional magnitudes= (members)
whose magnitude have proportional relationships to each other or quantities of
magnitudes= (members) given the appropriate relative magnitude.
46
Vitruvius, De Architectura, I, 2, 2,.
47
Vitruvius is quite eclectic in his views, but in a great many cases he is influenced
by Stoic philosophy, e.g. in his view on the creation of civilization in II, 1, 1-7, and in
his ethical considerations in VI, praef 5; VII, praef 1-8.
48
The four categories of Stoic ontological definition are substratum, quality, state
and relative state, each of them comprising the preceding ones.
49
According to TLL some of the latiore sensu meanings of elegans are praestans,
egregious, perfectus, and when referring to man-made objects bene compositus etc.
According to OLD elegans has the significance of 1) careful in choosing, fastidious,
peculiar etc.
50
Vitruvius uses the word elegans in 16 cases and elegantia in a further 6. In quite
a few instances it has the meaning of well formed, well composed eg. I. 6, 1:
oppidum Mytilenae magnificenter est aedificatum et eleganter= the town of Mytilene
is magnificently built and well formed; V, pr. 1: verborum elegans dispositio=
the nice arrangement of words.

51

Granger translates: The kinds of the Arrangement are, Morgan: Its forms
of expression are, Fleury: Les aspects de la disposition sont.
52
Species has the meaning of aspect or visual appearance and not of a
subdivision of class in all five passages in which it is used in book I: I, 1, 4; I, 2, 3;
I, 2, 4; I, 2, 5; I, 3.2. According to OLD species has the meaning of 1) something
presented to view, a spectacle, sight 3) visual appearance, look, aspect 5)
outward appearance 10) a subdivision of class or kind, a sort, species. According
to LSJ the equivalent Greek word eidos has the following meanings: 1) form 2)
material shape 3) shape, form, expression etc.
53
A topic discussed in V, 11, 1-11.
54
Discussed in V, 6, 6.
55
Discussed in V, 1, 9-10.
56
I do not understand perspective as a single vanishing point perspective, but as
a primitive method of determining the diminution of magnitudes depending on the
distance of the depicted objects from the viewer; see P. Lephas, On Vitruviuss
concept of scaenographia, Quaderni ticinesi di numismatica e antichit classiche 25
(1998) 261 ff.
57
H. Brunn, Geschichte der Griechischen Knstler (2nd edn. Stuttgart 1889) 98ff.
58
C. Watzinger, Vitruvstudien RhM 64 (1909) 202ff.
59
F. Schlikker, Hellenistische Vorstellungen von der Schnheit des Bauwerks nach
Vitruv (n. 5 above), 70 ff.
60
J. J. Pollitt, The ancient view, 153 ff. Pollitt gives a very accurate translation of
Vitruviuss eurythmia: Eurythmia is a beautiful appearance and a fitting aspect of the
parts in compositions, The ancient view, 145.
61
E. Petersen, Rythmus, AbhGott, N.F. 16 (1916-17) 1 ff.
62
See above, in my interpretation of the term dispositio.
63
Translated by F. Granger.
64
An other passage, attributed to Geminus (or Damianus?), which appears in
Herons Def. 135 may be referring to paintings, probably stage paintings, and not to
buildings: it points that architects, when drawing buildings, must make the columns
thicker in the middle, so as to create a work that is eurythmon with regard to the way
in which we perceive it. Since the possible dates of this passage range over a period
of 400 years (see P. Schuhl, Platon et l art de son temps (Paris 1933) 74 ff.), it can
really be of little help in the present discussion.
65
Translated from So up to appear by J. J. Pollitt, the Ancient View of Greek
Art (1974), 144. Philo explains the process of refinement of architectural forms
through history.
66
J. J. Pollitt, loc. cit., 148.
67
See above on proportio and symmetria. Vitruviuss definition of Symmetry in
Latin, along with translation by F. Granger, M. H. Morgan and Ph. Fleury, is quoted
above in this paper just after the definition and respective translations of Order. The
French translation of symmetria in the Belles Lettres edition is, in my view, also
excellent.
68
J. J. Pollitt, The Ancient View of Greek Art (1974), 69.
69
Vitruvius, De Architectura, I, 2, 5. Status should be understood latiore sensu.
Vitruvius asserts that the construction of temples of the Ionic order to Juno, Diana,
Father Bacchus and the other gods of that kind, will be in keeping with the middle
position (habita erit ratio mediocritatis) which they hold (trans. M. H. Morgan).
BIBLIOGRAPHY

J. von Arnim, Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta (Leipzig 1903).

H. Brunn, Geschichte der Griechischen Knstler (2nd edn Stuttgart 1889).
L. Callebat, Rhtorique et architecture dans le de Architectura de Vitruv, Le
project de Vitruve (Roma 1994) 31 ff.
E. Frzouls, Vitruve et le dessin d architecture, Le dessin d architecture dans
les socits antiques, Actes du colloque de Strasbourg, 26-28. 1. 1984 (Strasbourg
1985) 213 ff.
H. Geertmann, Teoria et attualit della progettistica architettonica di Vitruvio, Le
projet de Vitruve (Roma 1994) 7ff.
P. Gros, Les fondements philosophiques de l harmonie architecturale selon
Vitruve, JTLA 14 (1989) 13 ff.
J. A. Jolles, Vitruvs Aesthetik, Ph. D. Thesis (Freiburg 1905).
H. Knell, Vitruvs Architekturtheorie, Versuch einer Interpretation (Darmstadt
1985).
P. Lephas, On Vitruvius concept of scaenographia, Quaderni ticinesi di
numismatica e antichit classiche 25 (1998) 261 ff.
E. Petersen, Rythmus AbhGott, N. F. 16 (1916-17) 1 ff.
J. J. Pollitt, The Ancient View of Greek Art (New Haven and London 1974).
F. Schlikker, Hellenistische Vorstellungen von der Schnheit des Bauwerks nach
Vitruv, Ph. D.Thesis (Berlin 1940).
P. Schuhl, Platon et l art de son temps (Paris 1933).
R. Scranton, Vitruvius Arts of Architecture, Hespeeria 43 (1974) 494 ff.
C. Watzinger, Vitruvstudien, RhM 64 (1909) 202 ff.
Ancient authors
Aristotle, Metaph. ed. trans. H. Trendennick (Loeb 1933).
Cicero, N.D., ed. trans. H. Rackham (Loeb 1933).
Cicero, De fin., ed. trans. H. Rackham (Loeb 1914).
Euclid, Elements, ed. J. L. Heiberg E. S. Stamatis (2nd edn Teubner 1977(.

Heron, Def. ed. J. L. Heiberg (Teubner 1912).

Philon, Mech., Synt. ed. R.Schoene (Berlin 1893).
Plato, Timaeus, ed. trans. R. G. Bury (Loeb 1929).
Plato, Philebus, ed. trans. H. N. Fowler (Loeb 1925).
Vitruvius, De Architectura, ed. trans. F. Granger (Loeb 1931).
Vitruvius, De Architectura, ed. trans. C. Fensterbusch (Karlsruhe 1964).
Vitruvius, De Architectura (dai libri I-Viii, ed. trans. S. Ferri (Roma 1960).
Vitruvius, De Architectura,. trans. M. H. Morgan (Harvard U.P. 1914).
Vitruvius, De Architectura, ed. trans. Ph. Fleury (Les Belles Lettres 1990).