Development of Greek Temple Architecture From Its Inception Through the Hellenistic Period

Greek Temple Architecture From Its Inception Through the Hellenistic Period

Present day Greece still retains the Greek temples, shrines and sanctuaries of the pre-Hellenic period. The modern world of architecture and historians regards these temples very highly because of their unique and simple designs and also because of their apparent beauty and technical excellence. These temples have a profound history behind them because they stand testament to perhaps one of the most astonishing occurrences in the recorded human history -- the Greek religion. The Greeks had several hundreds of gods as they thought that everything in life was full of gods. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) discuss this phenomenon: "The presence of gods or demigods might be felt on towering mountain heights or on a headland overlooking the storm-lashed sea; in mysterious woodland thickets, ravines, and caves, the solemn stillness of a grove, or the middle of a sunny, fertile field. From ancient graves heroes buried in the distant past wrought good or ill, while the defense of forts and cities, the activities of street and market, the deliberations of governing bodies and decisions of public assemblies could none of them do without the proximity of guardian and guiding deities. And for these a dwelling had to be prepared (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

This paper reviews the requisites of Greek religion, including the early methods and influences on temple construction and shapes. The paper starts be revealing the religious customs of the Greek civilization and the role of the priests in the Greek religion from its inception through the Hellenistic period. This aspect is important because it will allow us to understand the basic structure of the thoughts behind the Greek religious activities and also provide us with a brief outlook about the power structure in the Greek religion. Subsequently, the paper assesses the reasons behind the choice of the location for the temples. Here the paper mentions the major trends and turning points, such as social and historical explanations, to better understand the choice of location. Lastly, the paper analyzes the architecture of the Greek temples. Here the paper mentions the technical aspects and the physical structures of the temples. This paper will assist the scholarly world in better understanding the development of Greek temple architecture from its inception through the Hellenistic period.

The Religious Rituals and the role of the Priests in the Greek Religion:

The religious customs of the Greeks had not been limited to a few rituals but had been diverse and numerous in nature. This demonstrates the importance of religion and the status of gods amongst the Greeks. It is important to note here that the diversity of the Greek religious activities had been equivalent to their multiple desires and the differences they observed between themselves and their gods. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) write, "Besides sacrifices, the gods received in their sanctuaries an abundance of thank-offerings from private persons, associations, and the state, in return for the favors that they had bestowed. Figurines and large statues of the deity worshipped, bronze tripods and cauldrons, weapons taken from the enemy, and monuments that had been donated out of a tithe of the crop, a trading profit, or the spoils of war all accumulated in the sacred precincts, together with statues of men and youths, women and girls, by means of which the male members of the community offered up themselves. They appeared not in naturalistic portraits but so to speak idealized as figures of the greatest beauty, vitality and strength, intended to delight the gods. The same notion underlay the contests without which virtually no major festival occurred at the famous sanctuaries from the archaic period onwards (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Furthermore, it is interesting to note here that unlike Christianity, where an institution of priesthood and clergy is considered to be unquestionably essential for communication purposes between the god and humanity, the Greeks did not consider the role of a clergy-like institution between themselves and their gods to be necessary. This shows that the Greeks considered themselves to be very close to god and did not allow other people to come between themselves and their gods. Therefore, no specialized institution of mediation existed in the Greek religious activities. The knowledge about the general customs of the various rituals observed in the Greek religious activities had been passed on from generation to generation. Research has also shown that the head of the family carried out the necessary sacrifices to make their gods happy. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) write, "For state religion was at one time attended to by the most eminent families, or else it actually sprang from the cult of a single family, which thenceforth had the right to appoint the priests of the god in question from among its own members. The seer, too, not infrequently came from a family in which the art of interpreting omens was handed down from one generation to the next. It is true, however, that most priests of the public cult were chosen for a year or even for life by lot, so that up to a point the deity himself selected his own servants. Purity in the sense of freedom from bodily defects, and -- for priestesses at least -- also chastity, were both prerequisites for the tenure of holy office (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Furthermore, the official duties of the priests in the Greek religion had been very limited when compared with the roles and responsibilities of the priests in the Christian religion. Their duties had been limited to primarily taking care of the temples of their gods and taking care of the sacrifices made by the people of Greece. They also did not receive any official income for their services. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) write, "His official duties, which included, besides carrying out sacrifices and other rites or celebrations, custody of the temple and all the god's possessions, left the priest time for other activities, at least in the smaller sanctuaries. Hence, he no more received a salary than did the holders of other honorary offices, obtaining instead a share of the sacrificial flesh and the hide of the slaughtered animal, as well as fees in natural produce or money. At the bigger shrines these revenues were indeed so rich that they alone sufficed to tempt people into assuming or buying priestly office (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Sketching Social and historical Meaning from the Location of the Greek Temples

Many historians have undermined the status and importance the Greeks gave to their sports and other national festivals. This is because much of the present literature on Greece pays heavy emphasis on the Greek mythology. However, some historians have profoundly studied the influence of sports and other religious festivals in the Greek culture.

Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) discuss the significance of games in the Greek culture: "The fact that Pindar's songs of victory were already in antiquity grouped as Olympian, Pythian, Nemean, and Isthmian odes, shows that the public games held during the great celebrations at Olympia, Delphi, and Nemea, and on the Isthmus of Corinth, surpassed all others in importance and fame (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Olympia

This place was considered to possess a very scenic view and held tremendous amount of importance to the Greeks because of its tree-covered landscape, fine valleys, plains, sharply rising mountains and streams biting deep into the landscape. Many historians have considered the scenic beauty of this place and the games held here to be the two major reasons for the construction of a temple. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) describe the beautiful landscape of this place and write, "this is the very reason why a sacred place could develop there at which, Greeks from the geographically and politically, fragmented motherland, and from the daughter-cities in south Italy and Sicily across the Ionian sea, assembled to worship jointly, and where they became conscious, over and beyond all differences and boundaries, of their unity (Gruben, 1963, as cited in Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

The culture and customs that had been cultivated in the temple and around Olympia held great significance to the Greeks, all through their history. "The force of the tradition and the power of fascination that Olympia radiated remained effective till the triumph of Christianity, which saw this sanctuary as a bastion of heathen religion (Gruben, 1963, as cited in Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Delphi

While, Olympia can be considered to be the most favored place for sporting activities; Delphi can be considered to be most famous for its oracles and prophecies. "At the former: Zeus, the mighty god of the heavens at the latter: Apollo, his radiant son. Apollo had no more been resident, in primitive times in the place where he was later most highly honored than had his father (K. Schefold, 1946; G. Roux, 1952; A. Orlandos, 1960, as cited in Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

The temple of Delphi held great significance to the Greeks as mentioned above. While, many historians have failed to recognize the traces of the temple and have established their facts on the shared memory of the Greeks. Some historians have found concrete evidence that a temple had been build in this place. "The temple of the classical period, before which stood a large altar given by Chios, was erected at the end of the sixth century by the Attic family of the Alcmaeonidae on the site of the building burned down in 548. It was paid for with money collected throughout the entire Greek world, and -- partly at the family's expense -- provided with a marble pronaos and magnificent pediment figures. An earthquake destroyed this edifice in 373, and its replacement could not be completed until about 330. Thus, what can still be seen today of the foundations, structural members, and recently re-erected columns belongs to the period when Greece came under the shadow of Macedonian power (K. Schefold, 1946; G. Roux, 1952; A. Orlandos, 1960, as cited in Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

The Isthmus and Nemea

The two temples of Isthmus and Nemea are considered to be not as famous as the temples in Olympia and Delphi because of the religious and symbolic importance of the later two. Nonetheless, every year, the Greeks used to gather in these places for their national festivals and games. People from all corners of Greece used to come here to celebrate the occasion. "Together with the hero Palaemon, Poseidon, the sea-god and earth-shaker, had since the sixth century possessed a temple in a grove of stone-pines on the sea-girt isthmus, with its many earthquakes, where the festival was celebrated under Corinthian leadership (A. Frickenhaus, 1911, as cited in Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Regional Temples

Three out of the four temples mentioned above had originally been regional temples, in the sense that they had been managed and looked after by the neighboring regions. They developed national significance with the passage of time. The only temple given national significance, from its inception, had been that of Delphi because of the Oracle and the prophecies it carried with itself. Besides these four temples, all other temples had been restricted to a certain regional area. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) write, "The influence of the other regional sanctuaries was confined to a definite area, and they remained closely dependent on the community to which they belonged politically even if they achieved pan-Hellenic importance, or at least claimed (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Eleusis

Alongside a river in the Saronic Gulf, towards the north of the isle of Salamis, remains the Thriasian valley which has been surrounded by high mountains and isolated from the plains of the city of Athens by the famous mountain range names Aegaleos. The primary reasons for the foundation of a temple in this place had been for economic prosperity. This can be gauged form the fact that the richness of the Thriasian soil had guided the neighboring inhabitants to worship the food-provision earth-mother "Demeter." This worship later on paved way to the construction of the temple. The remains of this temple can be seen on the southern slant of the acropolis mount underneath the later telesterium. "In mature archaic times, the goddess already had a temple on the same spot, and undoubtedly she was by then being honored with the mysteries the existence of which in the seventh century is attested by a hymn handed down to us as a work of Homer's (G. Mylonas, 1961, as cited in Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Temples of Zeus and Hera

Zeus and Hera were considered to be the gods of heaven, but historians agree to the fact that the temple of Zeus and Hera had been constructed in a later stage. Kahler (1948) discuss the reasons for the late creation of the temples of these gods, "We came across the greatest Zeus sanctuary and one of the most venerable temples of Hera at Olympia. Not until later did the god of the heavens receive there a splendid building of his own, in which he was present in effigy; and only later still at Nemea, another pan-Hellenic religious centre dedicated to him. Whereas the womanly Hera was obliged at an early date to seek a home, Zeus's element was the open-air: people felt close to him on mountain heights, or in a grove with its trees stirred by the wind. Many peaks dominating a wide expanse of land or sea bore altars of Zeus, and in looking up at them the surrounding population felt united (Kahler, 1948, as cited in Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Dodona

In an isolated mountain plain of the remote area of Epirus, underneath the towering Tomarus mount, remains the spot of Zeus's most well-known prophesy. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) discuss the reasons for the creation of the temple in Dodona, "Presumably the sky god and his consort, here called Dione, were brought from the north by Greek immigrants to this spot, which in remote antiquity appears to have been sacred to a fountain deity. Thenceforth, Zeus Naios was lord of Dodona; to him, sacrifices, gifts, and games (Naia) were offered (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Local Temples

The local temples had been located outside the cities and their fame and glory had been limited to the neighboring inhabitants. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) discuss the reasons for the creation of the temples of these gods, "Most of the innumerable holy places outside the cities had only local importance; they were confined in themselves and in their influence to a spot where a deity's power could be directly experienced.

" Three local temples have been considered so that a basic conception can be acquired about the reasons for the construction of local temples (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Bassae

The Bassae temple is considered to be one of the most attractive temples standing today. Historians have been greatly inspired by the structure of the stones and other materials used to construct this temple C.R. Cockerell (1860) discusses the reasons for the creation of the temple in this small locality, "From the mountains of south-western Arcadia, the winds sweep down to the Ionian sea, and bring fresh, wholesome air to the more low-lying places. Near the hamlet of Bassae (the glens), at a spot where immediately below the topmost summit one first becomes aware of these winds, a small dwelling was built as far back as the seventh century for Apollo the bringer of health. Not long after, his sister Artemis, the mistress of the mountain forests and for unknown reasons Aphrodite too, received similar abodes. When later on, during the first decade of the Peloponnesian war, an epidemic that visited the town of Phigalia near the sea was clearly driven out by the mountain winds, the inhabitants thanked Apollo the helper (Epicurius) for this by erecting a large temple to him on the ridge near his old precinct (C.R. Cockerell, 1860, as cited in Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Aegina

Aegina had been a very vibrant place in terms of economic activity. The people living here had been financially thriving for a long time before the construction of the temple. After the construction of the temple, the people of this place use to celebrate an annual festival of their sky-goddess, for whom the temple had been constructed. A. Furtwangler (1906) discusses the reasons behind the inception of the temple is this area: "Since remote times, an altar of Zeus had stood on the towering mountain heights of Aegina, an island that early on became a sea-power and grew rich as a trading centre. To all who dwelled near the Saronic Gulf and to all seafarers, 'the mountain', as people simply called it, was visible as a sacred central point, with the result that the sky god was worshipped there as 'pan-Hellenic.' (Furtwangler, 1906, as cited in Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963)

Sunium

This place possessed a temple not because of the magnificent location, but for the reason that Poseidon, the god of the ocean, showed his heavenly control in the surrounding area of the wave-struck cape. Rodenwaldt (1963) discusses the reasons behind the inception of the temple is this area: "In former times, the sea around the southern tip of Attica was often whipped up by storms, just as it is today. Here Poseidon seemed to be present in all his might, here frightened sailors prayed to him, and here atop Cape Sunium, in the bay of which vessels sought shelter, the powerful god had to be put in a friendly mood by means of sacrifices and offerings. Colossal stone statues of youths were erected up there even before a temple was built in the sixth century (Rodenwaldt, 1963, as cited in Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Conclusion of this section

While we conclude this section, it is important to note here that temples had also been created not only in numerous urban places, such as, the temple of Citadel and the temple of the Athenian Acropolis, but also in several towns as well, such as, the temple of Aeschylus. The social and historical reasons behind the inception of these temples are pretty much the same as the reasons behind the construction of the temples in other places in Greece. It is also important to note here that the common themes behind the construction of the temples had been to either commemorate the activities and accomplishments of their gods or to protect themselves from the harms and troubles.

Greek temple architecture from its inception through the Hellenistic period

Sketching Contextual framework to understand the Greek Temple architecture

It will be highly unfair to compare the modern architecture of temples and shrines to the architecture of temples and shrines in Greece from their inception through to the Hellenistic period. This is because while the Greeks had been very simple in their method of building temples for their gods and goddesses, the modern temples and shrines have been constructed using the latest technology, equipment and advanced mathematical computers. Furthermore, the Greeks had not been very creative in their designing as the structures of the temples throughout Greece shows that the designs of all the temples are pretty much the same. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) writes, "Once upon a time, nearly three thousand years ago, a modest structure was created in Greece out of columns, beams, walls, and a roof, and it was repeated for centuries with only the most trifling changes. People did not even seek to enrich it and to give it a certain variety by adding new forms; on the contrary, they were for ever pruning and simplifying it (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

However, if one does need to understand the thinking behind the construction of the temples from an architectural perspective, while still living in the scientific era then one must clearly understand that our thoughts and impressions about architecture and our contemplations will never mesh with those of the Greeks in the Pre-Hellenistic period. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) further elaborate this point by asserting, "We are making a mistake if, with our way of looking at nature determined by the romantic movement, we regard temple and landscape as an aesthetic whole. The temple is a completely independent, self-sufficient entity. It rises on a site sacred to a god. Through the planes of its steps it separates itself from the ground; through compact rows of columns its body marks itself off from its surroundings. As an object carrying within it the laws of its own perfection, it remains the same wherever it is built: on a mountain slope, on marshy lowlands, in the narrow confines of a crowded city, in an open grove, on the seashore. A different unity with the landscape does indeed exist: a mythic one. Long before there were any temples, a clairaudient people could at particular spots hear the voice and perceive the actions of a god; and the spirit of these hallowed places may likewise still act upon even our duller senses (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Furthermore, it should be understood that we are living a market economy, where every move is made to inspire the consumer to buy the product. Same can be said about the architecture of our times. The construction companies build temples in order to attract the masses. However, the same cannot be said about the Greek builders. They neither considered the view of the people of Greece nor did they assess the comfort and attraction level of the temples. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) shed some light on this issue: "It pays no regard to neighboring structures; it does not bother about the spectator. Its builders did not exploit the appeal of perspective intersections and foreshortenings, nor did they try by means of central approaches or optical axes to set it in a planned square and strengthen its impact on the beholder. They only discovered and hesitantly set foot on the new territory of these effects at the end of the classical period. Moreover, the narrow interior of the naos, only dimly lit through the door and its space further restricted by the columns within it, is not an architectonic room in our sense of the term. It is not a room that seizes the eye by means of light and amplitude, through the verve or contrast of its limiting surfaces; an interior that determines the form of the exterior. The naos is clearly not much more than the container required for the cult image, and the few who entered it only did so for the sake of this image. Meetings, sacrifices, and prayers -- everything in which the congregation took part -- occurred out in the open, around the altar set before the temple (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Form the above two quotations, it is clear that the concept of "architecture" as we understand and follow today is completely different to the concept of "architecture" understood and followed by the Greeks to construct their temples from their inception through to the Hellenistic period.

Assessing the Greek Temple architecture

As mentioned above that the meaning of architecture in Greece had been different to the meaning of architecture today. Therefore, one must picture and envision to oneself the plain and simple method of sculpture and carving, so as to understand, accept and ultimately admire it. In order to picture and envision, one must understand the Greek culture, laws, concept of gods and their ritual beliefs (Some of which have been mentioned above in great detail). Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) discuss the architecture of the temples of Greece, "It is a sculptural, corporeal architecture built up of solid, tangible parts, of squared stones, columns, and beams that through the secure way in which they stand, support, and bear down constitute an organic whole. In it, it is not the hollows and spaces, but what is substantial, firmly contoured, in fact sculptural that has been given form; and the line that divides it from the two-thousand-year-long tradition of Roman and Western European architecture cannot be too rigidly drawn, especially if we want to distinguish the beginnings of this tradition in Greek architecture (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Research has shown that the Greek builders had been inspired by the basic structure of the human body. The remains of the structural designs of their temples have made the historians come to an understanding that the entire concept of the temple had been build after carefully understanding the human body and its movement. This demonstrates not only the thought process of the Greek builders, but also their in depth and profound knowledge about the inherent laws of nature and human biology. Helmut Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) write, "As with men, whose limbs are kept in due relation to each other by internal laws, the members of the temple grow in fixed proportions as the size of the whole increases. Though the small buildings of the early period have steps and doors of a magnitude determined by a man's stature and the length of his stride, the crepidoma steps of the monumental stone temples dating from the sixth century can no longer be climbed, and the gigantic doors are no longer measured with a human gauge. This growth of the parts along with the whole extends even to the roof tiles, which on the more costly edifices are often carved out of marble, and to the last decorative detail. Here again we meet the self-sufficiency of this architecture, with its dimensions that do not depend on those of the human frame, its structure organized instead according to inherent laws. Yet this very fact makes it all the more fundamentally related to man (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

The temples were decorated with various paints and colors to give it a touch of excellence. Many other things had been used for decorating the temples, including hand-colored leaves and tendrils to enhance the structural beauty of the temples. Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) provide an in depth and profound analysis of the temple decoration styles of the Greeks. They write, "Even when it is only painted, the decoration contributes to the sculptural nature of the temple. The brightly colored rows of leaves, the restrained key patterns, the exuberant volutes, the delicate yet vivacious friezes of tendrils and blossoms are never just applied from without to enliven dull surfaces. Instead of being decorative trimmings, mere ornaments, they form the joints, the seams, and the crowning feature of the structure. They, so to speak, crystallize out of the building's inner framework, and appear as a mediating 'expression' where the forces of load and support meet or die away. It is significant that we have no suitable word for this type of decoration. In Greek, Koalzog means both inner order and decoration (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Temples without sculptures are like Churches without the priests. Sculptures of gods had a special significance to the people of Greece and the builders used to place special emphasis on the positioning of the sculptures, while constructing the temples. Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) give a thorough analysis of the psychology of the Greek people and the positioning of the sculptures in the Greek temples. They write, "At the earliest stage of development, definite places were in fact made available for it. The shallow triangular spaces formed by the pediments at each front of the temple are occupied by celestial beings: by groups of gods, heroes, and daemons (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Furthermore, in order to better illustrate their meaning, they provide two very detailed examples of the positioning of sculptures in two different temples. Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) write, "On the rectangular metope panels that encircle a Doric temple below its horizontal corona, the deeds of the heroes and mythical battles are represented (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

" and, "In the long, continuous frieze of the Ionic temple, processions and fights or feasts of the gods run their course. Flying figures or fantastic plant forms crown the top and corners of the pediments (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

Since gods and goddesses held the greatest respect amongst the Greeks, any fault or flaw in their statues and sculptures were not tolerated at all. Therefore, the craftsmen used to be paid very heavily for their skills and endeavors as a great deal had been asked from them. As a result, when the statues had been completed and positioned in their stipulated places, they attracted a lot of people and looked immensely beautiful. Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) write, "Just as a sculptural principle inhabits the temple, so the sculpture is characterized by an architectonic element: the lucidity of its construction, the clarity of its articulation, a quality that is more than technical and that has been designated by the word 'tectonic', which people often use without understanding it. "?" In its primary sense means the carpenter's art, which enables him to join things together correctly. It was precisely this that mattered to the Greeks, whether they were creating an earthen vessel, a statue, or a temple. No blurred transitions were tolerated. The limits and cohesion of the parts present themselves openly and unambiguously to the eye, as does also the inner scaffolding of the whole (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).

The concept of tectonic quality augmented with time and each era brought with it increased importance to the structures. It would undoubtedly be a useless task to consider and explain the augmentation and changes in the structural designs in each era, since very little literature is present on this subject. However, one can clearly and easily describe the common features of the temples from the standpoint of their historical growth and development. Berve and Gottfried Gruben (1963) write, "In archaic architecture, a prominent role is at the same time played by the separation of the structural members, each of which on its own account expresses its nature to the full. In the architecture of the classical period, the tectonic quality penetrates manifestly within. The coherence becomes apparent, movement and counter-movement enter into play, the life of the construction at last exists wholly in the union of its parts, a union that like every intellectual synthesis is a harmony of antitheses (Berve and Gottfried Gruben 1963).