当前位置: X-MOL 学术Arethusa › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Vitruvius and the Limits of Proportion
Arethusa Pub Date : 2016-01-01 , DOI: 10.1353/are.2016.0020
Andrew Riggsby

I come to the present topic with some trepidation. Unlike many of the contributors to this volume, I am not a Vitruvian scholar, nor does my main interest—even in this paper—lie with Vitruvius himself as such. Rather, I wish to consider the (exceptionally rich) evidence he provides for some more general questions of Roman metrology. This inquiry does not have to do with antiquarian questions of the “correct” modern equivalents for various Roman measurements; I suspect those questions are ultimately unanswerable and even incoherent for reasons beyond the scope of this paper. I ask, instead, what styles or modes of measurement were available to the Romans and what considerations dictated their use in particular contexts. This is a question I address more broadly elsewhere, but Vitruvius’s text proves so metrologically rich that it deserves to be treated on its own. De Architectura is, of course, one of the Roman texts densest in measurements, along with a number of medical and agricultural works and the writings of Frontinus and the Elder Pliny. Even among the works just mentioned, it stands out both for the way measurement is crucial to the tasks at hand (a Natural History could be written without measurements) and for how measurement is explicitly thematized (Scribonius Largus has only two sentences on the measures he uses in his drug recipes). Vitruvius is presumably a product of the metrological culture he is embedded in, just as any author is a product of his or her culture more broadly. At the same

中文翻译:

维特鲁威和比例极限

我带着一些惶恐来到现在的话题。与本书的许多撰稿人不同,我不是维特鲁威学者,我的主要兴趣——即使是在这篇论文中——也不在于维特鲁威本人。相反,我想考虑他为罗马计量学的一些更普遍的问题提供的(异常丰富的)证据。这项调查与古人问题有关,即各种罗马测量的“正确”现代等价物;我怀疑由于超出本文范围的原因,这些问题最终是无法回答的,甚至是不连贯的。相反,我问的是,罗马人可以使用哪些风格或测量模式,以及哪些考虑决定了它们在特定环境中的使用。这是我在其他地方更广泛地解决的问题,但维特鲁威的文本在计量学上非常丰富,值得单独处理。当然,De Architectura 是测量最密集的罗马文本之一,还有许多医学和农业著作以及弗朗蒂努斯和老普林尼的著作。即使在刚刚提到的作品中,它也因其测量对手头任务的关键方式(自然史可以不用测量而写成)和测量如何明确主题化(Scribonius Largus 只有两句话关于他的测量)而脱颖而出。在他的药物配方中使用)。维特鲁威大概是他所嵌入的计量文化的产物,就像任何作者都是他或她更广泛的文化的产物一样。同时 以及一些医学和农业著作以及弗朗蒂努斯和老普林尼的著作。即使在刚刚提到的作品中,它也因其测量对手头任务的关键方式(自然史可以不用测量而写成)和测量如何明确主题化(Scribonius Largus 只有两句话关于他的测量)而脱颖而出。在他的药物配方中使用)。维特鲁威大概是他所嵌入的计量文化的产物,就像任何作者都是他或她更广泛的文化的产物一样。同时 以及一些医学和农业著作以及弗朗蒂努斯和老普林尼的著作。即使在刚刚提到的作品中,它也因其测量对手头任务的关键方式(自然史可以不用测量而写成)和测量如何明确主题化(Scribonius Largus 只有两句话关于他的测量)而脱颖而出。在他的药物配方中使用)。维特鲁威大概是他所嵌入的计量文化的产物,就像任何作者都是他或她更广泛的文化的产物一样。同时 它的突出之处在于测量对于手头任务的关键方式(自然史可以在没有测量的情况下编写)以及测量如何明确主题化(Scribonius Largus 对他在药物配方中使用的测量只有两句话)。维特鲁威大概是他所嵌入的计量文化的产物,就像任何作者都是他或她更广泛的文化的产物一样。同时 它的突出之处在于测量对于手头任务的关键方式(自然史可以在没有测量的情况下编写)以及测量如何明确主题化(Scribonius Largus 对他在药物配方中使用的测量只有两句话)。维特鲁威大概是他所嵌入的计量文化的产物,就像任何作者都是他或她更广泛的文化的产物一样。同时
更新日期:2016-01-01
down
wechat
bug