2024/01/11 by Pavlos Lefas · 1 voice
Agricultural and Biological Sciences · Arts and Humanities · Physics and Astronomy · #Historical Astronomy and Related Studies #Historical Philosophy and Science #Water management and technologies
paper · doi:10.1093/aesthj/ayad035
openalex publication_date 2024/01/11 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30
Abstract The present paper proposes a new reading of one of the most obscure passages of De Architectura; in I, 1,3 Vitruvius claims that in architecture there is always a signifier and a signified, but his approach differs from Quintilian’s as presented in the latter’s Institutio Oratoria. Vitruvius’ is closer to Chrysippus approach, but he fails to mention the third constituent, the tynchanon. This omission is probably due to the fact that Vitruvius speaks of designs rather, than of existing buildings. What can successfully signify a proposed building is, according to my reading, the design and erection of a building that is easily recognized by the public as realizing the intentions of the community to erect the proposed building. Such successful signification constitutes the ultimate criterion for good architecture.