GREECE. Meanwhile, even before the rise of Persian arehitecture, the Greeks had originated the Doric and Ionic (for illustration, see these titles) orders in all their essential features. The temple. \Odell is the one central figure in this architecture, appears to have developed out of the main hall of the Pelasgie royal palace, as it is seen in Crete, Troy, Tiryns. and Myeenx, through a middle stage of crude brick walls, wooden columns, architraves, and gables, with terra-cotta revetment and decoration, into the final type of stone temple which was reached as early as the Seventh Century tee. It is in Sicily and Southern Italy that the earliest works of the Doric style are to be found (Syracuse, Selinus, Metapontum), while the earliest Ionic temples were in Asia Minor, at Samos and Ephesus: but these hardlyrival the Done in age.and their ruins do not belong, like those of the Dorie temples, to the primitive structure. The normal typeof these temples was a building raised on a three-storied basement, and consisting of one main cella chamber (naos) usually supplemented at one end by a smaller chamber (opisthodoinos), and pre ceded at the other end by a pronaos, the whole being surrounded by a colonnade on all four sides, surmounted by an entablature and crowned on the two short ends by gables. The :esthetic Greeks did nut plan great columnar halls or courts like those of the Egyptian temples, but relied on external effects almost entirely; on re fined beauty of outline and proportion. Never, until the period of decadence, was there any at tempt at impressive size or picturesqueness. The Dark style was heavy in proportion and plain in ornament, in comparison with the Ionic, but provided for more considerable figured sculpture in the friezes, metopes, and gables. It prevailed at first oser nearly the entire Hellenic world, gaining gradually in delicacy and lightness, espe cially when handled by artists with Ionian blood, as was the case at Athens, which contains in the Parthenon and the Theseum the two finest works of the developed Perielean Age, though they are almost rivaled by some Italian and Sicilian works, such as the temples of Thestum (q.v. for illustration) and Girgenti. At this time other works, such as the Propylka at Athens. became worthy to stand beside the temples, and here the two styles—Do•ic and Ionic—were for the first time combined. The originality and daring of this Attic school were also shown in the Porch of the Maidens in the Erechtheum (q.v. for illustra tion). The succeeding Age of Praxiteles, and the Alexandrian Period brought even slimmer Doric proportions, increased favor for the more decora tive Ionic style (temples of Miletus and Ephe sus), invention of the still richer Corinthian (see article Corxmx), and the development of colossal forms of public. • civil, and sepulchral
architecture (such as the propyheas, theatres, odeons, stows, the altar at Pergamus, the mauso leum of Haliea•nasses), in which Oriental splen dor and love of the colossal overruled Hellenic reticence.
RomE. This prepared the way for Roman architecture. In the Royal and Early Republican Periods, Rome had followed the Etruscan and Latin types: wooden temples with terra-cotta revetments in the Doric style and civil struc tures of stone, vaulted and arched. These two types remained fundamental, except that before the close of the Republic stone had replaced wood and terra-cotta in the temples, the Ionic style had been introduced by Greek artists, and the Greek orders, with their lintels and columns, had been added as a surface decoration and framework to the constructive arcades in secular buildings. The Greek spirit informed the Roman in the sphere of att. without conquering it, for ordi fierily it is not difficult to distinguish the two styles. The Roman temples are not peristyles, but in antis, with a very deep colonnade in front, and this alone would be sufficient to make their appearance differ fundamentally, even without the substitution of the heavier Corinthian and composite forms for the Doric and Ionic. But the true nature. of Roman architecture appears in its civil structures: in theatres and amphi theatres. aqueducts. triumphal arches, palaces, villas, and, above all, in the baths and thermae. The Roman genius for composition shines in such great combinations of structures as the Villa of Hadrian, the Palace of the Cusars, the Forum of Trajan (see article FORUM), and the Baths of Caracalla and Diocletian. And the great vaulted interiors of some of these buildings, such as the Basilica of \laxentius and the Baths of Caracalla. surpass anything previously conceived of in architecture. With the Greeks, architecture had been plastic: with the Ronians, who devel oped the ideals of the Alexandrian Greeks, it was pictorial. it also combined, in the highest degree, utility and comfort with showiness and imposing and costly appearance. The whole civilized world was tilled with the monuments of this art—which fell heir to the cultures of both the Orient and Greece: