Smithsonian Magazine · People & society

Parthenon's Curves Not Optical Illusions, Mathematician Argues

A mathematician challenges the long-held belief that the Parthenon's subtle curves and bulges were intentional optical illusions designed to make the ancient Greek temple appear perfectly straight.

For centuries, it's been assumed that architects incorporated deliberate curves into the Parthenon's structure to counteract perceived sagging or narrowing. This theory, dating back to the Roman architect Vitruvius, suggested these refinements created a visually perfect, linear appearance.

However, mathematician Alain Goriely argues there is no evidence these features produce the proposed visual illusions. He examined four aspects of the Parthenon's structure, concluding they were not intended to trick the eye.

Goriely suggests the upward curvature of the stylobate and entablature might have been for practical reasons, like drainage. He notes that optical illusions might work in theory, but their effect in a real 3D building is different.

Regarding the bulging columns (entasis), Goriely states that the idea of straight shafts appearing concave lacks empirical support. Experts have suggested entasis might have conveyed a sense of tension or responsiveness to the weight the columns carried.

The wider corner columns, also previously attributed to optical correction, are similarly questioned by Goriely. He found insufficient evidence that illusions like irradiation would necessitate this design.

Goriely proposes that enlarged heads on the Parthenon's frieze figures were likely due to different ancient Greek body-head proportions, not an attempt to correct perspective.

Instead of optical illusions, Goriely posits these deviations were likely matters of practicality or aesthetic choice, possibly influenced by artistic director Phidias.

AI-samenvatting op basis van de bron.