architectural features, thoroughly dependent on the
Greek system. It is in accordance with all these
facts probable, as it is credible of itself, that
Italian architecture previous to its contact with the
Hellenes was confined to wooden huts, abattis, and
mounds of earth and stones, and that construction
in stone was only adopted in consequence of the example
and the better tools of the Greeks. It is scarcely
to be doubted that the Italians first learned from
them the use of iron, and derived from them the preparation
of mortar (-cal[e]x-, -calecare-, from —chaliz—),
the machine (-machina-, —meichanei—),
the measuring-rod (-groma-, a corruption from —gnomon—,
—gnoma—), and the artificial
latticework (-clathri-, —kleithron—).
Accordingly we can scarcely speak of an architecture
peculiarly Italian. Yet in the woodwork of the
Italian dwelling-house—alongside of alterations
produced by Greek influence—various peculiarities
may have been retained or even for the first time
developed, and these again may have exercised a reflex
influence on the building of the Italian temples.
The architectural development of the house proceeded
in Italy from the Etruscans. The Latin and even
the Sabellian still adhered to the hereditary wooden
hut and to the good old custom of assigning to the
god or spirit not a consecrated dwelling, but only
a consecrated space, while the Etruscan had already
begun artistically to transform his dwelling-house,
and to erect after the model of the dwelling-house
of man a temple also for the god and a sepulchral
chamber for the spirit. That the advance to
such luxurious structures in Latium first took place
under Etruscan influence, is proved by the designation
of the oldest style of temple architecture and of
the oldest style of house architecture respectively
as Tuscanic.(20) As concerns the character of this
transference, the Grecian temple probably imitated
the general outlines of the tent or dwelling-house;
but it was essentially built of hewn stone and covered
with tiles, and the nature of the stone and the baked
clay suggested to the Greek the laws of necessity
and beauty. The Etruscan on the other hand remained
a stranger to the strict Greek distinction between
the dwelling of man necessarily erected of wood and
the dwelling of the gods necessarily formed of stone.
The peculiar characteristics of the Tuscan temple—the
outline approaching nearer to a square, the higher
gable, the greater breadth of the intervals between
the columns, above all, the increased inclination
of the roof and the singular projection of the roof-corbels
beyond the supporting columns—all arose
out of the greater approximation of the temple to
the dwelling-house, and out of the peculiarities of
wooden architecture.