The 302 mm foot measure on Salamis ? - article ; n°2 ; vol.19, pg 119-136

Bozidar Slapsak

Description

Dialogues d'histoire ancienne - Année 1993 - Volume 19 - Numéro 2 - Pages 119-136
18 pages
Source : Persée ; Ministère de la jeunesse, de l’éducation nationale et de la recherche, Direction de l’enseignement supérieur, Sous-direction des bibliothèques et de la documentation.

Informations

• Publié par: DIALOGUES_D-HISTOIRE_ANCIENNE
• Publié le: 01 janvier 1993
• Nombre de lectures: 17
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

Monsieur Bozidar Slapsak
The 302 mm foot measure on Salamis ?
In: Dialogues d'histoire ancienne. Vol. 19 N°2, 1993. pp. 119-136.
Citer ce document / Cite this document :
Slapsak Bozidar. The 302 mm foot measure on Salamis ?. In: Dialogues d'histoire ancienne. Vol. 19 N°2, 1993. pp. 119-136.
doi : 10.3406/dha.1993.2108
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/dha_0755-7256_1993_num_19_2_2108DHA 19,2 1993 119-136
THE 302 mm FOOT MEASURE ON SALAMIS ?
В. SLAPSAK
Université de Ljubljana
The new metrological relief from Salamis (fig. 1), first
presented to the international scholarly community by Ifigenia
Dekoulakou-Sideris at the 13th Congress of Classical Archaeology
in Berlin in 1988 !, has now been fully published by the same author
in AJA 94 2. It has representations of several anthropomorphic
measures (and that of a ruler) 3 and can be best compared to the
Iphigenia DEKOULAKOU-SIDERIS, Ein metrologisches Relief aus
Salamis, Akten des ХШ. Internazionalen Kongress fur Klassische
Archaologie Berlin 1988 (1990). (I owe initial information about the
find, as well as a copy of the abstract, to Dr. Kienast of the German
Archaeological Institute in Athens).
I. DEKOULAKOU-SIDERIS, A metrological relief from Salamis, AJA
94,1990,445-451.
The following measures were identified by the author :
fathom (оруига) - no measures could be taken
cubit (nňx1^) " 487 mm (p. 447 and fig. 3)
foot (ncHÍc) - 301 mm (p. 447 and fig. 3)
span (атйа^) - 242 mm (p. 447 and fig. 3) В. Slapš ak 120
famous Oxford metrological relief (fig. 2) 4. Measurements by
Dekoulakou - Sideris revealed that the two foot measures
represented (foot and ruler) differed by about 2 cm in length 5, from
which she concluded that it was actually used as a double standard
for the 302 and 322 mm foot units and related measures 6. While she
would connect the 322 mm foot unit, not documented elsewhere, and
240 mm (p. 449 ; when calculating
deflections from the assumed standard,
the author used this figure).
On the representation of the span, two further measures were taken :
orthodoron (óp\tó8<i>pov) - 215 mm (p. 449 and fig. 3)
finger (SáxTuXoc) - 20 mm (p. 449 and fig. 3)
Along this line, the palm (naXaioxii) at least should be taken into
consideration as well (to be measured either on the representation of
the fathom or on that of the cubit).
The ruler was measured at 322 mm (p. 447 and fig. 3).
4. DEKOULAKOU-SIDERIS {supra n. 2) 446 ; for the Oxford relief see :
A. MTCHAELIS, Ancient Marbles in Great Britain (1882) 559-560
(n. 83) ; G. ROSCH, Altertumliche Marmorwerke von Paros (1914) ;
E. LANGLOTZ, Frti hgriechische Bildhauerschulen (1927) 133 (Paros
n. 16) and 136 ; G. LIPPOLD, Die griechische Plastik, Handbuch der
klassischen Altertumswissenschaft 3,5 (1950), 176 ; M. ROBERTSON, A
history of Greek art (1975), 199, pi. 64a ; A. KOSTOGLOU-DESPINIS,
Provlimata tis Parianis plastikis ton 5ou Eona o.Ch., PhD Thessaloniki
(1979), 159-160, pi. 52; B.S. RIDGWAY, Fifth century styles in Greek
sculpture (1981), 65 (App. 3 n. 1) fig. 38; I. BOARDMAN,
sculpture, The classical period (1985) 67-68, fig. 48 ; for Arundel
collection and early publications see : D.E.L. HAYNES, The
marbles (1975) 2-18, metrological relief on p. 20, pi. 11 ; for metrological
aspects of the Oxford relief see : F. MATZ, Tesa e piede sopra un
rilievo greco, Annali dell'lstituto di corrispondenza archeologica 46,
1874, 192-193, tav. Q ; F. HULTSCH in : A. Michaelis, Das Oxforder
metrologische Relief, AZ 37, 1879, 177-180; A. MICHAELIS, The
metrological relief at Oxford, JHS 4, 1883, 335-350 ; B. WESENBERG,
Zum metrologischen Relief in Oxford, MbWP 1974, 15-22 ; E. FERNIE,
The Greek metrological relief in Oxford, A] 61, 1981, 255-263 ; for
proportions see Michaelis, supra 1883, 344-349; E. LORENZEN,
Technological studies in ancient metrology (1966) ; but :
A. STEWARD, The canon of Polykleitos, JHS 98, 1978, 122431 and
FERNIE, supra, 262, а. П.
5. 301 and 322 mm.
6. DEKOULAKOU-SIDERIS (supra n. 2) 450. DIALOGUES D'HISTOIRE ANCIENNE 121
the related cubit (and other measures), with the pixpioc пт^ос of
Herodotus 7, she would see in the ruler, measured at 301 mm, a
confirmation of the foot of 302 mm, identified by Broneer in the
younger stadia in Isthmia and Epidauros as well as in some
Peloponnesian architecture of the 4th and 3rd centuries B.C. 8.
The new find immediately attracted our attention : a 302 (301)
mm foot standard would corroborate significantly the results of our
metric analysis of the land division in the chora of the 4th c.B.C.
Parian colony of Pharos on the island of Hvar (Dalmatia) 9, the
more so as Broneer's 302 mm foot was far from universally accepted
among the specialists in classical metrology and architecture 10. On
Dekoulakou-Sideris' identification of the foot a more general level,
standards would be a key argument in favor of the "permissive" line
in ancient metrology and a serious blow to the "reductionists" who
would admit the existence in the classical period of three foot
standards only, linked within a rational system n.
7. Herodotus 1, 178 ; see F. HULTSCH, Griechische und rômische
Metrologie (1882), 45-48; W. DÔRPFELD, Die kônigliche Elle des
Herodot und der philetaerische Fuss, AM 8, 1883, 343-358 ; also, their
discussion in AM 9, 1884. DEKOULAKOU-SIDERIS (supra n. 2,
447-448) believes that "the existence of the common cubit has now
been proved by the metrological relief from Salamis". We do not
share her optimism there. The question of whether the jiéxpioç nïixuç of
Herodotus refers to a local standard in Babylon or to a Greek standard
of measure will not be resolved by the sole occurrence in Greece of a
representation of a cubit, much less so if this representation is part of a
(standard) set of Greek anthropomorphic measures, whatever their
metric value. We think that the Salamis relief has in fact no bearing
on this tricky if unrewarding problem, so we will not refer to it in this
article any further.
8. O. BRONEER, Isthmia 1, The temple of Poseidon (1971), 174-181 (App.
1, The foot measure) ; see also: O. BRONEER, Isthmia 2, Topography
and architecture (1973) 63-64.
9. Z. STANCIČ and B. SLAPSAK, A modular analysis of the field system
of Pharos, in : J. Chapman e.a., Recent developments in Yugoslav
archaeology, BAR International series 431, 1988, 191-198.
10. A typical statement would be that of WESENBERG (supra n. 4), 16,
a. 4 : "... Die Nachmessung von Laufstrecken kann zwar ein schon
bekanntes Fussmass bestatigen, nicht aber ein sonst nicht gesichertes
Fussmass begrunden".
11. Attic, Doric (Phaidonian) and Ionic (Samian), the ratio being 27 : 30 :
32 : H. RIEMANN, Zum griechischen Peripteraltempel (1935), 1-6 ; 122 В. Slapš а к
We decided therefore to revise the data as presented and
analysed by Dekoulakou-Sideris and therewith to verify the
reliability of her conclusions.
Measures
From the beginning it was obvious that the author committed
a metodological flaw by assuming that the two representations of
the foot unit - the ruler and the foot - were to be taken as metrically
reliable, whereas the other representations - the orthodoron, the
span and the cubit - were to be measured in relation to them and the
differences observed interpreted as deflection from the standard 12.
We can see no justification for such an assumption. If we admit, as
the author does, a stone-cutter's error as considerable as 3,7 %
within the same measure group (e.g. between the representation of
the cubit and the orthodoron), we must be prepared to accept a
considerable degree of imprecision also with the representations of
both foot measures 13. Indeed, from a methodological standpoint it is
A.v. GERKAN, Der Tempel von Didyma und sein antikes Baumass,
JŮAI 32, 1940, 141-150 ; W.B. DINSMOOR, The basis of Greek temple
design : Asia Minor, Greece, Italy, Atti del settimo Congresso
internazionale di archeologia classica (1961), 355-368 ; for the
discussion see WESENBERG {supra n. 4), 15-17, a.4 ; W. HOEPFNER,
Einfuhrung, Masse - Proportionen - Zeichnungen, in : Bauplannung
und Bautheorie der Antike, Diskussionen zur archaologischen
Bauforschung 4, 1983, 13-23; E.L. SCHVANDNER, Zur
entschlusselung "Ionic" for the 294 antiker mm Baumasse, foot unit ; ibid. I adopt 24-25. here Dinsmoor the terminology would use as
introduced by v. Gerkan, see B. WESENBERG, Beitrage zur
Rckonstruktion griechischer Architektur nach literarischen Quellen, 9.
Beiheft AM, 1983, 19 ; W. MÛLLER-W1ENER, Griechisches
Bauwesen in dcr Antike (1988) 31.
12. DEKOULAKOU-SIDERIS (supra n. 2), 449 : "Having the rule on the
Salamis relief as a metrical unit of 0,322 m, one can now confirm the
lengths of the fathom, cubit, and span on the relief in accordance with
the ancient literary evidence". ... "The discrepancies in milimeters
noticeable in different multiples of the foot... are attributable, I
believe, to purely technical reasons : the lack of absolute accuracy on
the par