The Herodotus Encyclopedia. Группа авторов
direct contrast to the vertical emphasis of Doric, the effect of the early Ionic temple is emphatically horizontal. The decorative elaboration of its façade is not graduated from bottom to top; it is confined to the colonnade and equally distributed within it. The colossal colonnade is the temple’s decorative elaboration, a band whose horizontal impact is magnified by its immense length and by the strong horizontal lines of the three‐stepped lintel (epistyle) that bounds it on top and that emphatically separates the colonnade from the completely unadorned and immense pediment above.
The horizontal emphasis of Ionic responded to and interacted directly with its surroundings: the colossal temples of Ionia were sited in flat coastal plains, and the boundaries between temple and LANDSCAPE and within the temple itself were intentionally blurred. The proportionately insignificant steps (of similar height to those of Doric temples despite the greater scale of the Ionic structure) barely broke the horizontal continuity of temple and landscape, and instead of clean separations between inside and outside, the temple presented itself in gradients of exterior and gradually increasing interior: from the outer edge of the temple’s top step to the outer colonnade, set well back from the step; to a second row of columns that also surrounds the temple; to pairs of columns that exactly repeat the wide central intercolumniation on the front of the temple and carry it back into and through the front room (the pronaos) to the wall of the cella proper, the main and innermost room. Lacking any clear and definitive boundaries between landscape and temple and between successive elements of plan, the spaces of the temple bled into each other and thus encouraged the passage from one to another. In the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus the transitions were even more ambiguous, as the temple was approached through a sacred grove, which became a forest of columns that led, deeper and darker within the temple to the final temple ambiguity and monumental confounder of expectation: the cella was unroofed, a blaze of light at the end of the religious procession. The continuity of the flat landscape and forest with the temple plan and horizontal emphasis of the elevation reflected and encouraged religious procession that began in the landscape and made its way through the ambiguous boundaries of nature and temple to the heart of the temple itself.
This was in direct contrast to Doric temples, whose vertical emphasis interacted with and complemented their siting on eminences in the landscape: lifted above the realm of everyday experience, they were approached from below and afar, eyes raised at a distance, eyes raised upon arrival by the geometry of the façade and by the significant proportional height of the temple steps. Unlike Ionic, Doric columns clearly marked the boundary of the temple, raised as they were above their immediate surroundings and set exactly at the edge of the top step. Here there was no ambiguity about where the temple began and where the realm of humans ended. Nor was there any architectural compulsion to enter: no horizontal continuity with the surrounding landscape, no processional spacing of the façade columns, no continuity of column spacing, scale, and alignment from exterior to interior; and, finally, there was the pediment which, until the construction of the east pediment of the Temple of Apollo at Delphi in the later sixth century BCE, confronted the viewer with terrifying images of monstrous creatures looking directly into the eyes of anyone approaching and wreaking bloody havoc.
SEE ALSO: Acropolis; Art; Dorians; Dialects, Greek; Ethnicity; Monumentality; Religion, Greek
REFERENCE
1 Rhodes, Robin F. 1995. Architecture and Meaning on the Athenian Acropolis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
FURTHER READING
1 Barletta, Barbara A. 2001. The Origins of the Greek Architectural Orders. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2 Jones, Mark Wilson. 2014. The Origins of Classical Architecture: Temples, Orders and Gifts to the Gods in Ancient Greece. New Haven: Yale University Press.
3 Lawrence, A. W. 1996. Greek Architecture. 5th edition. New Haven: Yale University Press.
4 Spawforth, Antony. 2006. The Complete Greek Temples. London and New York: Thames & Hudson.
ARDERICCA (Ἀρδέρικκα)
CHRISTOPHER BARON
University of Notre Dame
1) A village in Assyria (Mesopotamia), location unknown. Herodotus relates how the Babylonian queen Nitocris diverted the flow of the EUPHRATES RIVER, in order to build defensive improvements in BABYLON, by digging channels near Ardericca so that the river curved three times—as it still does in his own day (1.185.2).
2) A site in CISSIA, exact location is unknown; perhaps near modern Qirab in western Iran (Forbes 1964, 40–41). Herodotus describes it as a royal stathmos (either a staging post of the ROYAL ROAD or part of a royal estate) and places it 210 stades (about 23 miles) distant from SUSA (6.119.2). DARIUS I forcibly relocated the population of ERETRIA on EUBOEA to Ardericca after the Persians captured their city in 490 BCE. Herodotus notes natural deposits of BITUMEN, salt, and oil near Ardericca and describes how they are collected (6.119.3).
SEE ALSO: Assyrians; Fortifications; Measures; Nitocris (1); Prisoners of War; Rivers
REFERENCE
1 Forbes, R. J. 1964. Studies in Ancient Technology, vol. 1. Leiden: Brill.
FURTHER READING
1 Scott, Lionel. 2005. Historical Commentary on Herodotus Book 6, 399–401. Leiden: Brill.
ARDYS ( Ἄρδυς, ὁ)
CHRISTOPHER BARON
University of Notre Dame
Lydian king, son of Gyges, second in the Mermnad dynasty. According to Herodotus, Ardys ruled for forty‐nine years, brought PRIENE under Lydian rule, and attacked MILETUS (1.15). Another tradition preserved by Nicolaus of Damascus (FGrHist 90 F63) gives his name as Alyattes (Pedley 1972, 22). We know from Assyrian documents that Gyges’ son (not named) succeeded to the Lydian throne c. 644 BCE (Cogan and Tadmor 1977, 79–80). It is possible that “Ardys” was in fact a title meaning “son” (Carruba 2003, 151–54), and Nicolaus (FGrHist 90 F44) also records an Ardys among the earlier Heraclid kings of LYDIA.
SEE ALSO: Alyattes; Assyrians; Gyges son of Dascylus; Mermnadae; Near Eastern History
REFERENCES
1 Carruba, Onofrio. 2003. “Λυδικὴ ἀρχαιολογία. La Lidia fra II e I millennio.” In Licia e Lidia prima dell’Ellenizzazione, edited by M. Giorgieri, M. Salvini, M.‐C. Trémouille, and P. Vannicelli, 145–70. Rome: Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche.
2 Cogan, Mordechai, and Hayim Tadmor. 1977. “Gyges and Ashurbanipal: A Study in Literary Transmission.” Orientalia 46.1: 65–85.
3 Pedley, John Griffiths. 1972. Ancient Literary Sources on Sardis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
AREIANS ( Ἄρειοι, οἱ)
CHRISTOPHER BARON
University of Notre Dame
Areians (or Arians, but see the separate entry) appear in Old Persian INSCRIPTIONS as Haraiva (e.g., DB §6). They occupied territory in present‐day Afghanistan around Herat (BA 98 B4). In providing a list of the provinces (archai or SATRAPIES, 3.89.1) into which DARIUS I divided the Persian Empire, Herodotus states (3.93.3) that the Areians were part of the sixteenth administrative district (νομός, nome). They also appear in the CATALOGUE of XERXES’ invasion force, carrying Median bows but otherwise equipped like the BACTRIANS (7.66.1, spelled Arioi here).
SEE ALSO: Archery; Arians; Sisamnes