Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Masonry
Cyclopean
The earliest example of substantial building in Greece was the Cyclopean masonry found in Mycenae and nearby in other Bronze Age citadel cities. It is unknown how the ancient Mycenaeans moved such large stones, some of them, such as the megalithic lintel stones over the Lions Gate, weighing up to several tons. In fact, very little is known about any of their construction techniques. The skills were lost in the years after the Bronze Age ended, around 1100 B.C. What we know though, is that the stones were only very slightly worked with tools, and were probably found lying around the area rather then quarried. Smaller chunks of stones would be jammed between any cracks between the larger ones. Because of the great mass and weight of the larger stones, the walls proved to be very durable and sturdy.
Polygonal
When Greece came out of its Dark Age around 800 B.C., it had to reinvent the masonry skills it saw in the ruins of Mycenae. Unless rectangular blocks were necessary for aesthetic reasons, masons tended to try and imitate the Cyclopean style as best they could, because it took less time and effort to work the stones into proper shape. They used smaller stones than seen in Cyclopean masonry because they didnt have the technology to move stones as large as those used in Mycenae. In Polygonal masonry, masons cut blocks with curved outlines and fit them together like a puzzle, using the natural form of the rock This masonry was very stable, and because they interlocked so tightly, the wall didnt need any extra support from metal clamps.
Horizontal
About 500 B.C., it became high style to lay blocks in more or less horizontal rows. This sense of order was seen as more formal than the irregularity of the polygonal masonry, and was often used with temples and important civic structures. It was less stable than the interlocking polygonal style though, and so the masons would secure the blocks with horizontal clasps and vertical metal dowels to prevent any lateral shifting. All of the metal was further fixed by a seal of molten lead, all of this security important in Greece, which was often hit by earthquakes. With all of the metal used and the time it took to finely shape the stone, this sort of masonry was expensive, and saved for only the most prestigious structures.
Priene street with supporting wall for the temple of Athena Polias, fourth century
Ashlar / Isodomic
This masonry was a fifth century development, and basically a refinement of the horizontal masonry. At the corners, the joints were often placed perpendicular to one another in alternating layers. Generally this was used for smaller or highly important surfaces as the regularity could seem monotonous if carried on for too long. Generally, for added interest, larger blocks were used for the lower courses of the walls, and is often seen in temples where the foundation is above ground and where an intermediate size stone softens the difference between the large foundation slabs and the smaller ashlar stones.
Others
Decorative Polygonal
In the Hellenistic period, polygonal masonry came back into style, but instead of selecting rocks from the surface of the ground and just barely working them, later masons deliberately carved the stones into complex geometrical shapes. This style was mainly reserved for decorative masonry, real polygonal masonry was still used for more utilitarian purposes.
Others
Decorative Polygonal
In the Hellenistic period, polygonal masonry came back into style, but instead of selecting rocks from the surface of the ground and just barely working them, later masons deliberately carved the stones into complex geometrical shapes.
The earlier polygonal from Delphi shows more natural shapes, while the irregularities of the later wall seem manufactured in comparison
Others
Slanted Ashlar
This style seems to be a sort of compromise between polygonal and horizontal masonry. The blocks are flat on the top and bottom and set in relatively straight courses, the only difference was that every so often, the sides were cut on angles. These angled edges retained some of the extra stability polygonal masonry gave and so masons felt safe to use this style for purposes such as fortification despite the small block size, which would usually lead to weaker walls. Although most of the walls were still constructed using Polygonal masonry, this provided a cleanerlooking alternative for embellished pieces of the walls.
Others
Slanted Ashlar
This style seems to be a sort of compromise between polygonal and horizontal masonry. The blocks are flat on the top and bottom and set in relatively straight courses, the only difference was that every so often, the sides were cut on angles. These angled edges retained some of the extra stability polygonal masonry gave and so masons felt safe to use this style for purposes such as fortification despite the small block size, which would usually lead to weaker walls. Although most of the walls were still constructed using Polygonal masonry, this provided a cleanerlooking alternative for embellished pieces of the walls.
Building Techniques
Mystery of Mycenae
When Greece regained an interest for monumental building around 800 B.C., Mycenae was already in ruins. The Greeks knew that they still had the same materials as their ancestors; timber, mud bricks, and stone, but they had forgotten the techniques that the Mycenaeans had developed for their massive structures. The Greeks could only guess that the walls and other structures must have been built by the giant Cyclopes, hence the name Cyclopean masonry.
Stone was used only for the base of the buildings to keep water moister away from the mud walls, but these unworked stones were generally just those that were found on the surface of the ground.
The buildings themselves were competently built, but there was certainly little if any attempt of elaboration, and everything was kept on a relatively small scale as the proportions were dependent of the size of the tree trunks they could find.
Greeks wanted to emulate the style of their ancient heroes, and were given the chance through increased interactions with Egypt.
Around 660 B.C., the Greeks had given support to Pharaoh Psamtik, who regained control of Egypt from Assyrian control. His victory opened the door for increased trade and communication, and the Greeks founded a trading town named Naukratis on the western Egyptian coastline around 620 B.C..
Homer
Megalithic Building
Egypt built monumental works completely in stone, and the Greeks eagerly studied their techniques in order to develop their own style. From the early seventh century onward, they would have had new knowledge of how to dress stone as well as how to physically put up such megalithic buildings. One of the easiest comparisons between Greek and Egyptian architecture is the Doric order.
The Greeks at first closely followed the Egyptian models, although in their earlier temples it can be seen that they still needed to develop their refinement.
But although the Greeks did copy some of Egyptian building techniques, their buildings in whole were very different from their Egyptian counterparts, keeping to traditional Greek forms.
Temple of Queen Hatshepsut, Deir-elBahari, Egypt, c. 1500 BC
Megalithic Building
Note that the Temple of Apollo, which is one of the earliest examples of Greek megalithic buildings, has monolithic columns. This would later be refined by building the columns up in drums rather than trying to carve the entire pillar, which took larger pieces of stone and so was both more expensive and more cumbersome.
A channel would be cut around the block to the depth of the height required and then it would be detached from its base with wedges.
a) The U-Shape holes on top, here for levers rather than cranes because of the small stone size The dove-tail clamp connecting the top of the two stones
b)
f) Preliminary finishing
This is somewhat misleading, because the Greeks did know about other construction methods such as the arch, they just chose tradition instead of new forms.
In fact, the arch and other more experimental forms can be seen in secular structures. The arch in particular, was saved for structures with thicker walls, which would provide the proper amount of buttressing for the outward thrust.
Bibliography
Coulton, J. J. Greek Architects at Work. London: Elek Books Ltd., 1977. Lawrence, A. W. Greek Architecture. 5th ed. New York: Yale UP, Pelican history of art, 1996.