Bryn Mawr College Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology Faculty Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology Research and Scholarship 1977 Review of Der Bassai-Fries, by Charline Hofkes- Brukker and Alfred Mallwitz Brunilde S. Ridgway Bryn Mawr College, [email protected] Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.brynmawr.edu/arch_pubs Part of the Classical Archaeology and Art History Commons, and the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons Custom Citation Ridgway, Brunilde S. 1977. Review of Der Bassai-Fries, by Charline Hofkes-Brukker and Alfred Mallwitz. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 36:36-37. This paper is posted at Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College. http://repository.brynmawr.edu/arch_pubs/21 For more information, please contact [email protected]. BOOKS CharlineHofkes-Brukker and AlfredMall- a Bassaiexpert who had written on boththe a nr-shapedinner colonnadewith four- witz, Der Bassai-Fries, Munich: Prestel- architectureand the sculpture. In i962 Mall- sided Ioniccapitals supporting the carved Verlag, 1975. 180 pp., z folding pls., 117 witz'sarticle on thetemple plan sparked the frieze.When spur walls were added (by an- illus.,plans, drawings. DM 85.00oo. idea of a joint publication,with Mallwitz other architect)for technicalas well as completinghis contribution by 1973.In 1970 aesthetic(?) reasons,the columnsbecame It is a paradox of archaeologicalstudies E. M. Stresow-Czak6took excellentphoto- semi-columnswith curtailedcapitals, and that one of the best-preservedmonuments of graphsof the friezewhich Hofkes-Brukker, withspreading bases for purely optical pur- antiquity, the temple of Apollo at Bassai who meanwhilehad published several arti- poses (projectY). Whenthe two southern- (Arkadia), should remain so problematic, cles on selectedBassai topics, arranged in most capitalsflanking the centralcolumn both in the interpretationof its plan and in whatshe considered the original sequence. provedaesthetically unsatisfactory, the cor- the evaluation of its unusual inner frieze The resultantbook is composedas fol- respondingspur-walls were made diagonal carvings. These two main aspects of the lows. An initial section by Mallwitzde- and threeCorinthian capitals were substi- buildingare so strictlyconnected that neither scribesthe discovery of thetemple, the gen- tuted,to avoid cornerproblems (plan Z). can be satisfactorilydiscussed in isolation. eral sanctuary,and the buildingitself with Thesechanges resulted in thediagonal walls Despite their fame, however, they have re- its unusualN-S orientation.Analysis fo- beingbuilt without adequate underpinning, ceived only sporadic attention, and never cuses on floor and ceiling patterns,and theirbases expanding beyond the original the monographic treatment and definitive gives rise to the theoryof threesuccessive stylobate,and demanded a reductionof the publicationthey deserve.The 1946 book by plans for the structurewithin a relatively friezelength. In the book, the reasoning is re- E. Kenner,with few introductorycomments shorttime. Chronology(ca. 430-400)and versed,each previousplan beingdeduced on the architecture,concentrated on the architect(s)are briefly discussed in the clos- fromthe anomalies in thefinal arrangement. frieze, but the authorcould only work from ing pages.The secondsection by Hofkes- Yet I wouldquestion the existenceof three old photographs,since the reliefsthemselves Brukkeris by farthe moreextensive. Intro- Corinthiancapitals, because of theaccounts were still inaccessiblein the postwar British ductorycomments on subjectmatter and ar- of the earlyexcavators and the differencein Museum. Of the several articlesdevoted to rangementare followed by description of the the columnbases, the centralone being the architecturalproblems, a majorstudy by frieze slabs printed below the pertinent unique,not simply a lessspreading version of W. B. Dinsmoor,in AJA,LX (1956), 401-452, photographs.In orderto demonstratese- thelateral ones. Once this argument is elimi- attemptedto reconstructthe sequenceof the quentialprinciples, each slab is illustrated nated,so is the reasonfor changingplan Y frieze slabs on the basis of fasteningmarks twice, so that turningthe pagesdoes not intoplan Z. Inaddition, the very deep under- on architraveand frieze backers.No agree- breakthe visualcontinuity. Major traits of pinningof the innercolonnade revealed by menthas beenreached on virtuallyany point. style and compositionare treatedin two Greektesting in 1971 suggeststhat spur- The Bassai frieze is now displayedin an ar- more "chapters"with many subheadings wallswere planned from the very beginning, rangementworked out by P. Corbett,but no (B:I-6; C:i-6), andthe entirefrieze project in what Martinconsiders a Peloponnesian theoreticalbasis for the sequencehas yet been is attributedto Paionios.An Englishsum- tradition,thus invalidating plan X. published.Architectural articles continue to mary(trans. J. W.Graham) outlines only the Othercriticism seems premature. N. Ya- appear-the latest by R. Martin, BCH, c sculpturalconclusions. Selected bibliogra- lourisand F. Cooper'snew investigation and (1976), 427-442-but each proposes a differ- phy,index, and a chartof measurements(the testingat thesite are soon to beincorporated ent readingof the plan ratherthan supplying slabsas originallycarved and as eventually into a book by Cooperwhich promises to a stone-by-stoneaccount of the remains. cut down)are followedby a foldingplate givethe stone-by-stone account we stillneed. The book under review could therefore comparingthe present display in theBritish Mallwitz'stheories will thenfind their ulti- have filled a great gap in our factual knowl- Museum(the frieze as set up in the temple) matetouchstone. edge. Its double-barreledapproach, encom- withthe sequenceas originallyplanned, be- So will Hofkes-Brukker'sarrangement of passing both the architectureand the sculp- forealterations, according to Hofkes-Bruk- the frieze slabs. Thoughsome of her se- ture, could have resultedin an authoritative, ker'stheories. The museuminventory num- quencesare convincing,others could be if not definitive,publication. Yet it is fair to bersare retained, but preceded by "H"and questioned.For instance,she uses Centau- state from the beginningthat such high ex- a serialnumber in thepostulated sequence. romachy slab H II-528 as an example of pectations have not been met; for all its Mallwitz'scontribution does not greatly continuity between plaques by visualizing value, Hofkes-Brukkerand Mallwitz's con- differfrom his i96z article:he only formu- the left-handmostLapith as moving to de- tributionremains provisional. lateshis arguments from a differentangle and fend a youth being attacked beyond the The projectwas begunby Hofkes-Brukker publishesa newlydrawn plan. The original joint. But (by personal analysis in 1974) I in 1957,under the inspirationof W. Hahland, project (X-attributed to Iktinos)called for could detectthe Lapith'sfingers on the near- 36 37 by Centaur'sneck, helpingto bring the knuckles,and Venus rings-a whole wealth ity by Mario Torelli provides not only a monsterdown. The Lapith'sinvolvement of details that only directconfrontation can reasonable outline of the development of would then remainwithin his own slab, reveal, no matter how superb the illustra- Etruscan civilization but also stimulating ratherthan extending to the next.That this tions. comments about the natureof Etruscanso- narrativecrossing of joints could indeed On more theoreticalgrounds: the omis- ciety. Of interest, for example, are his re- exist is shownby a shootingAmazon on sion of the sculpturedmetopes from the dis- marks about the revitalizationof Etruscan H 15-534which, with Corbett, I wouldcon- cussion makes the treatment of the frieze power and culture at the close of the fifth frontwith the warrioron H zz-533(rather seriously incomplete. The hypothetical ca- centuryB.c.; this revisionof the traditional than with H 16-535).These, however, are reerof the mastersculptor, Paionios (?), with view of Etruscan"decline" is surelycorrect details.Hofkes-Brukker's main point is that a bout in South Italy under the influenceof and affects the judgmentof numerouslater the two narrativecycles, Amazonomachy the elusive Pythagoras, is not convincing, monuments,whose chronologyand interpre- andCentauromachy, were originally planned nor is the tracingof the various elementsof tation are often linked to beliefs about the to meetin the centerof the cella,since the style to different geographical areas. The state of Etruscanpower and its impactupon unevennumber of slabsin eachcycle, with text is difficultto read and even the English the nationalpsyche. consequentuneven length, would corre- summary does not improve matters. Such The other introductorysections are less spondwell with the differencein the two drawbacksoffset the many positive sides of extensive; that on art, while very sound, is halvesof thecella measured on theE-W axis Hofkes-Brukker'sstudy: impressive learn- regrettablyalso brief.Given the materialdis- of the middlespur-walls. Thus both cycles ing, wide range, keen intuitions, and some cussedin the heartof the book, some readers aredivided into three parts, with the central obviously compellingand original interpre- might wish for a more detailed treatment; one occupyingthe shortside, eitherfrieze tations. the novice may turn elsewhere. confrontingin