DACIA, N.S., tomes XLVI–XLVII, Bucharest, 2002–2003, p. 53–112 THE EVOLUTION OF THE IONIC CAPITALS FROM THE HELLENISTIC AGE TO THE ROMAN AGE. A STANDSTILL IN GEOMETRY? MONICA MĂRGINEANU-CÂRSTOIU Some previous studies have pointed out how statistical analyses revealed the distinct group of Hellenistic capitals 1 . In the following we shall concentrate upon the Hellenistic cluster, while reviewing some relevant data on the results of an analysis regarding the evolution of the Ionic capital up to the emergence of the Vitruvian type, and further, during the Roman Age. To this end, we shall resort, on the one hand, to statistical analyses, for their relevance as regards the external characteristics (variables), and on the other, we shall look into the geometric support of the Hellenistic and Roman composition – the internal characteristics (variables) – as it is the one that by concentrating in itself the conception upon the composition makes it irradiate to the exterior of the finite artistic work, being from beginning to end the inner generator of proportions (external variables) by which we usually characterize the finite architectural plastic body 2 . The new reference point of statistical analyses is the Vitruvian capital 3 . As that is a direct reflection of the Hellenistic influences 4 , we have considered that its presence could be useful at least for two reasons: by relating to it, one can apprehend which was the “target” of the evolution of the Hellenistic capitals, in other words, which were the composition trends up to Vitruvius’ age, and, implicitly, whether the trend that found in the Vitruvian capital a repository for its tradition was truly prevailing. Moreover, we’d like to use applied methods to look into the subsequent evolution – during the Roman Age – in the Ionic capital composition, and above all, what happened to the composition of the pattern conveyed by Vitruvius during the Roman time after him 5 . In other words, our interest was to see whether the Vitruvian pattern was a fortuitous reflection of the Hellenistic tradition 6 with no essential consequences – limited to a few particular cases – upon the designing of the Roman Ionic capital or, on the contrary, this pattern had further influences. I. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 7 ( Figs.1-7) &1. The CA 8 (Correspondence Analysis), the NMDS ( Nonmetric Multidimensional Scaling) and the Cluster Analysis have been applied to seventy-four Hellenistic and Roman capitals 9 , nine of which new 1 Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu, 1990, p. 80, Fig.1; Mărgineanu- Cârstoiu, 1997, p. 204; 186-187, Figs. 4-5; p. 198, Fig. 198; p. 202, Figs. 21-22. 2 Our interpretation of the geometric support ruling over the architectural composition was pointed out for the Doric capitals in Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu, 1994-1995, tackled more thoroughly in Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu, 1996-1998 for the Ionic capitals; the partial aspects detailed in the case of the Ionic capitals in Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu, A. Sebe, 2000, for a monument assemblage, see Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu 2000, p. 166-188. 3 We do hope that the prevalence of the Eastern capitals in the present study has no upsetting effect over the results, as the Vitruvian design has undoubtedly an Eastern origin. (P. Gros,Vitruve. De Architectura, Commentaire Livre III, 5,7, p. 166). 4 P. Gros, op.cit. 5 Partial aspects of the issue in Bingöl, 1980, p. 132-152. 6 Even if it inherited some significant experiments, from the Mausoleum in Halicarnassus, Magnesia on Meandru, Stoa of Attalos, etc. (Hoepfner, 1968, passim; P. Gros, op.cit., p. 157). 7 As can be seen in Annex 2, the list of variables does not include those that – in our previous studies- comprised the lower surface diameter (H). This removal is not the result of a personal choice, but that of the fact that for many (Roman) capitals the diameter sizes were not available (according to Bingöl,1980). However, taking into account that as early as the Hellenistic time the share of variables shifted to the zone of those expressing the relation to the central body (A/L, J/L, K/L,I/L), it is expected that the results should not be seriously damaged. For equally objective reasons, as regards the Roman capitals we focused our attention on the Eastern ones (catalogue in Bingöl, 1980). 8 Our having explained on other occasions the way applied procedures are handled spares us the task of doing it again (cf. Mărgineanu-Cârstoiu, 1990, Idem, 1997). 9 A few other pre-Hellenistic capitals can be added, introduced by testing. For the same reasons, two Histria capitals were “doubled”. (see Annex 1). As a test element the capital from Termessos was also introduced (no. 53) whose composition does not represent a real capital, but that of an incompletely preserved specimen.