Philo of Byzantium and the Colossus of Rhodes

Author(s): D. E. L. Haynes
Source: The Journal of Hellenic Studies, Vol. 77, Part 2 (1957), pp. 311-312
Published by: The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/629373
Accessed: 16/07/2009 09:49

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless
you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you
may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=hellenic.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed
page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the
scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that
promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend
access to The Journal of Hellenic Studies.

http://www.jstor.org
 NOTES

The Battle of Salamis-a Correction it was impossible to hoist up the rest (of the statue) and
place it upon (the feet), but the ankles had to be cast
In Map I of my article on the Battle in JHS lxxvi, upon (the feet), and, as when a house is being built, the
p. 32, the position of the Greek fleet's front line c. 8 a.m. whole work had to rise upon itself.'

FIG. I.-POSITION OF THE GREEK FLEET'S FIRST LINE ABOUT 8 A.M.

was incorrectly shown. It should be as shown here by 'ErrtxwvEv'etvis a key word for the whole of Philo's
the dotted line, in accordance with the text of the article description. An unfortunate slip in the translation used
on pp. 46 and 50. N. G. L. HAMMOND. by Maryon confuses it with E,7TtXawVVtetv 'to fill up' and so
destroys the sense of the passage. 'ErnXwvrV'FtV means 'to
Philo of Byzantium and the Colossus of Rhodes cast upon' the part already cast, and that implies casting
in situ. It is contrasted with 6T'hTtOEIvat 'to place upon',
In his article on the Colossus of Rhodes in JHS lxxvi, which would imply that the casting was done at a distance.
Mr. Herbert Maryon argues that the statue was not cast Since in 'casting upon' the molten metal which was to form
as is usually assumed, but formed of hammered bronze the new part would presumably have come into direct
plates. He bases his argument on the figure of 500 talents contact with the existing part, fusion (i.e. 'casting on'
given by Philo Byz. (iv. 6) for the weight of bronze used in the technical sense) would probably have resulted.
in the statue. A statue 120 feet high using this quantity
of metal would, he calculates, have walls rather less than iv. 4: Kai 6ta -roiTo TVoi)g s'v aiAAovgdvaptaiv-aa oi
one-fifteenth of an inch thick, which would be impossibly TeXVZat TAacorrovaot7TPCOTov, EcTa KaTa' 1atArj q tAOrAVT
thin for a large casting. XwvEv'ov5t Ka' TxkAo5 BovS x6T Eatlav
ovvOEvrc5 S 6d?
But Maryon runs into difficulties, I think, when he xw
r7rpO)TO z2vcvaTt T6 6EVTEPOV ItEpo; ElT7T7&7TAaOrTatKai
VoT'Xp XaAKOVPY?)OeVTt To' Tpt'Tov 8,7T16860d/ixaT, Kat tO 1xTda
tries to make Philo's description of the statue tally with , ov
this conclusion. For Philo unquestionably believed the ToVio 71a'AI V)T'v aVTxtv Ti' I'pyaoriag ikYX?1KEV E'7Tvotav
Colossus to have been cast. The relevant passage has ydap Evirv TdaYz? TrJOv 1tc.TaAAWV KMv7cTat.
already been ably discussed by M. A. Gabriel in BCH. 'And for this reason, while other statues are first
lvi, 1932, pp. 332-42, but is perhaps worth examining modelled, then dismembered for casting in parts, and
again here to bring out the particular points at issue.' finally recomposed and erected, in this case, after the first
iv. 3: '7i0o0O9 6' fla'atv 'K AEVK4' Ka' liap/Iapt'toE part had been cast, the second was modelled upon it,
hr' aVi3Tig I,Z'Xpt TJ3V dcrTpaya'Awov 7TPOYTOVI Iijpe&a and when this had been cast, the third was built upon it,
-rrtpag
Tok i766ag roTO KoAoeqova, Vo0iv xTqv ovrvuwTpiav e' (Lv and for the following part again the same method of
nizEAA8FOso'; S'lO/flZKOVTa'771rXVt' E"y8dpeorOat -T ydap t'xvo; working was adopted. For the individual metal sections
Txg' flac&i?8u '6q ToVk' a"AAovg dv6ptaVTag, ?f7T.pcKV7TreV. could not be moved.'
TotyapovUv OV'K Svr"v errtOtvat flacrTacaavTa TO Aoti6v6 Having illustrated the process of casting in situ by the
En7xwtvv'8VEt 6' i68tL Td initial example of the foot and ankle, Philo goes on to say
a bVpa', Kat KaG0arTep ET7T TV
(
that the same process was repeated again and again so as
advaflijvat To 7rn'V"PYOV E'O' aV'ToUi.
OtKO6O/IOVfWE'VWJ'V
to build up the statue in courses, a method radically
'Having built a base of white marble, (the artist) first different from that employed in casting statues of normal
fixed upon it the feet of the Colossus up to the height of size. The last sentence repeats the reason already given
the ankle-joints, having worked out the proportions in iv. 3 (Totyapoiiv K. T. A.) for this procedure.
suitable to a divine image destined to stand to a height
of seventy cubits; for the sole of the foot already exceeded iv. 5: Tijr Xw"viag 6U y'voyjdvq;, 8'i7 TCxV 7TPOTSTsAsCr-
/IeVWv epyWoV at Te TOWV ItoZAWOV Kat To'7T4ua
(in length the height of) other statues. For this reason 6tatpEaEt;
T17g Q(c6i'ag' 6nTpetTo Kat T6Ov eIrrdLOE/E,VCV 7Trep&OvljabaAit'Eo
1 I have v 3irtvotav
used R. Hercher's text (Paris i858). Orelli's T6 Or'K/Iya, 7va 6ta xjS epyaoia; zTp?)`rG r,? T
text (Leipzig, 1816), which is printed in Overbeck's a0rdAEvTov, det Toig avvTEAeAeroVchv yEAEat TOiY KoAooroio
Schriftquellen and used by Maryon and Gabriel, is fre- Xogv yfig' 6&rAaTOV 7T8ptXE(wV, KpVlrrwT(V To 7T7eTov?j/,UVov ij6rj
quently misleading. KaTayEtov, T'v TC)V E'ZO/'VW0V I?TT7TU5OV EI77tOLEXclT
XaO Y i
312 NOTES
'After the casting (of a new course) upon that part of
the work already completed, the spacing of the horizontal
tie-bars and the joints of the framework were looked to,
and the stability of the stone blocks placed within the
figure was ensured. In order to prosecute the plan of
operations on a firm basis throughout, (the artist) heaped
up a huge mound of earth round each section as soon as
it was completed, thus burying the finished work under
the (accumulated) earth and carrying out the casting of
the next part on the level.'
Philo has already told us in iv. 2 that the Colossus
had an armature constructed partly of squared blocks of
stone (Terpadr7o6ot AtOot) held together by iron tie-bars
(6tiaTrlye,uo%Aot) and partly of iron frameworks (aXe6iat
act6rpal); but its precise form must remain conjectural.
Maryon suggests that the object of the mound was to
provide a ramp by means of which the stone blocks and
metal for the armature could be hauled up to the heights
at which they were needed. No doubt, if the mound
was in fact conical,2 Chares would have used it for this
purpose. But it is very questionable if that is why he
built it. Maryon does Greek engineers less than justice
when he asserts (p. 69) that 'in the ancient world it was
not possible to lift such heavy masses with any available
tackle': 'Kat Ev TOlg' OlKO(OttKOiC ?pyot0 Qq6iwo~ KtVOVGt
JieydAaa/dpr'.3 And Philo gives a different, and very
convincing, reason why it was built. It was built, he'says,
in order to provide, at each successive stage of operations,
a firm and level (and, we may add, incombustible)
platform on which to carry out the casting. 'E7r[Tre6ov,
in the context, can only mean 'on the level at the top of
the mound' as opposed to Kardyetov, 'buried under the
top of the mound'.
Philo's account of the casting of the bronze ends here.
Nobody, I think, who reads it with an open mind could
fail to admit that it is a surprisingly consistent and
credible account to find in the pages of a late antique
rhetorician; and it is hard to believe that it does not go
back to a good Hellenistic source. Are we to reject it
simply because a single figure, mentioned by Philo once
and not supported by other evidence,4 cannot be recon-
ciled with it? Since figures are notoriously liable to
corruption, it seems more reasonable to reject the figure.
But, whatever we do, let us at least try to understand what
Philo actually said.
D. E. L. HAYNES.
2 Gabriel
(op. cit., 336-8) makes the ingenious sug- perhaps, a decorative wreath with which actors might be
gestion that Chares rammed the earth into a tower-like
scaffolding of wood copied from, or possibly actually
formed by, Demetrius Poliorcetes' helepolis.
3
'Aristotle', Mechanics xix. For the archaeological
evidence see Koldewey and Puchstein, Die griechischen times, in the second
Tempel in Unteritalien und Sizilien, 224 f.
4 Philo himself tells us
(iv. i) that the amount of
bronze used in the Colossus 'was so great that it nearly
caused a dearth in the mines; for the casting of the
statue was an operation in which the bronze industry of
the whole world was concerned'. There is also Constan-
tine Porphyrogennetos' story (de admin. imp. 2I), repeated
by Theophanes (Chronogr., ed. Classen, i. 527), of the
caravan of 980 camels (9oo according to Theophanes)
which transported the bronze after it had been sold as
scrap to a Jewish merchant. Such traditions are doubtless
exaggerated, but their existence suggests at least that the
quantity of bronze was impressively large, not a mere
I2-x tons. It is difficult to know what to make of Polybius' possibly Greek drama) to be enjoyed and appreciated.
statement (v. 89) that Ptolemy III Euergetes promised
the Rhodians, for the reconstruction of the Colossus
after the earthquake, 3,000 talents, Ioo00architects, 350
workmen and 15 talents a year for their keep. The
3,ooo talents, as Luders points out (Koloss von Rhodos, Hermolaos suggests a Greek freedman, perhaps of the
30, n. 33), were probably bronze metal, but why should
more bronze have been required?
A Greek Inscription found in Malta
On the 27th November, I95I, at a little distance
outside the ditch which marks the walls of the Roman
town of Melita (now Rabat-Mdina), in an area covered
with Roman tombs, a huge stone was found measuring
60 in. in length, 27! in. in height and Ig9 in. in breadth
cm. X 73'6 cm. x 53'3 cm.). It is a funerary
(I52-4
altar with a simply decorated mensa and sides. The back
has no decoration and its surface is rough. When exca-
vated the altar was found in a place where the rock was
cut to allow of its being placed against it and between it
and the wall of rock there was an empty space of a little
depth, clearly indicating that the space must have been
filled by some architectural structure of a nature slight
enough to be completely destroyed at a later date. The
front part is considerably decorated and bears the
following inscription:
XAIPE
:
nIAIAIOCEPMOAAO> /
eI nEPrAMHNOC KWMWAOC
-
K
KAI AYPICTHC- EBIW*EN
CTH : KE . YrFAINE
In English: Hail-P(ublius) Ailios Hermolaos, a
comedian and harp-player from Pergamon. He lived
25 years. Farewell.
The inscription is written in Greek because Hermolaos
was Greek and, presumably, also because Greek along
with Latin was up to a point the language of culture of
Roman Malta at the time.
On the left-hand side of the inscription, in the triangular
space, there is the letter 0 and in that on the right there
is the letter K. They stand for Oeo[l KaraXOoviotg, which
is a Greek translation of Dis Manibus, which, in the
abbreviated form D.M. is so often found in Latin sepul-
chral inscriptions. On the left-hand side of the inscription
there is a comedian's mask and, underneath it, an actor's
scroll. The lyre on the right-hand side of the inscrip-
tion points to Hermolaos's proficiency in the playing of
that instrument. The hanging decoration surmounting
the inscription is either just a decorative element or,
crowned. Underneath the 'inscription there is a ham-
mer and a plectrum used in playing on the musical
instrument.
The funerary altar must have been raised in imperial
century, possibly at the time of
Hadrian. The rounded e, c, ao for E, LX, Q suggest
that.
An interesting complementary feature is the fact that
a few ashes and remains of broken glass were found not
inside or behind the altar but underneath it. Presumably
a little space was dug underneath the altar and a glass
jar containing the ashes was put in it; in time the altar,
by its sheer weight, pressed upon and broke the glass
container.
From the discovery of this inscription one or two
deductions of an historical nature may be made. In the
second century A.D. social life in Roman Malta must have
been developed to a considerable extent for drama (and
Although no traces of Roman or Greek theatres have as
yet been found in Malta, dramatic entertainments may
have been held in the capital city or at least in the private
houses of well-to-do people. The name P. Ailios
Emperor Hadrian (whose full name was P. Aelius
Hadrianus). The taking of non-imperial names by