Page:History of Art in Phœnicia and Its Dependencies Vol 1.djvu/129

 MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION. 109 has happened in the temple at Amrit to the blocks interposed between the monolithic base and the huge slab which forms the roof. These smaller stones are greatly frayed away, and will in time be reduced to powder. Add to all this that the inequality in the materials and the method of filling in renders these Syrian structures very sensible to the shocks of earthquakes, and it will be understood that they are farther removed from the solidity of native rock than those Greek structures in which smaller units were used, but used with a skill that endowed them with a high power of resistance. The habits contracted in its early years never entirely dis- appeared from Phoenician architecture. In Greek construction each stone had its own part to play in the work to which it FIG. 43. Square pier from Gebal. Height 35 inches. From Rermn. belonged ; it was the member of an organic body, and the Greeks understood at a very early date that not more than one member should be combined with each constructive unit. In Syria the architectural idea and the constructive units did not preserve this logical connection ; when the Phoenicians made use of the column, they, like the Assyrians, carved it all, shaft and cap, from a single block. We take an example of this from the ruins of Gebal (Fig- 43)- 1 To their fondness for using the stone as it came from the quarry may be traced the Phoenician habit of employing what is called rustication ; it seemed natural to their masons to be content with dressing the edges of the joints and to leave the rest of their wall- 1 RENAN, Mission de rhenidf, p. 175, and plate xxv.