Talk:Bassae Frieze

A fact from Bassae Frieze appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 16 June 2010 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that John Henning's miniature models of the Parthenon Frieze and Bassae Frieze (pictured) took twelve years to complete?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2010/June.

Wikipedia

London High‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

British Museum High‑importance

	This article relates to the British Museum. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one, as needed.British MuseumWikipedia:GLAM/British MuseumTemplate:WikiProject British MuseumBritish Museum-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Visual arts

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles

Greece High‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Launch

The article contains a lot from Bassae when started ... but it will grow. Can you help? Victuallers (talk) 20:00, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Funnily enough I thought of writing an article on this a couple of years ago, but sloth got the better of me. I think I can do something with it over the weekend. Do you have any preferences about what should be added? Twospoonfuls (ειπέ) 22:34, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One thing that might be worth doing is this: there are 10 conjectured arrangements of the frieze including the BM/Corbett one, we could make a sortable table of the thumbs of the slabs that would order them according to each different sequence. Twospoonfuls (ειπέ) 23:12, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Count me in! I could help with making the table. I need the data on the ten orders and 23 representative pics. Good idea Victuallers (talk) 16:02, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, it was a three pipe problem, but I think I've matched up the Smith catalogue numbers (which are nearly universally used) and the photographer's numbers in the wikimedia commons gallery. However some are awkwardly cropped and don't always correlate one frame per slab. Smith numbers are on the left;

520-1077
521-1064
522-1058
523-1090
524-1067
525-1074
526-1057
527-1078
528-1086
529-1065
530-1071
531-1112
532-1099
533-1106 (some missing)
534-1102
535-1054
536-1097+1098
537-1100
538-1109
539-1094
540-1091
541-1051+1052
542-1053

There are nine conjectured reconstructions tabulated in Cooper and Madigan, The Temple of Apollo Bassitas, p.39 as follows: Ashmolean, Foster, Hahland, BM/Corbett, Dinsmoor, Hofkes-Brukker, Felton, Harrison and Cooper. And a tenth by Carpenter which I think was unpublished or incomplete, I'll have to check later. Twospoonfuls (ειπέ) 17:56, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very busy this weekend, but Monday should see some construction. I'm thinking about moving the pictures on to their sides (?) The idea would be that you would be able to see the frieze, but it might be a very tall table... comment? Victuallers (talk) 19:37, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For me, the only important thing is to cross-reference the schemes. Beyond that making it easier for the reader to visualise the frieze is to be preferred. Maybe it would be possible to have the thumbs across the top row and make the whole table scroll? That would be wiki-mark-up black belt stuff, surely? Twospoonfuls (ειπέ) 20:24, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Work in progress ...

Bassae Frieze pictures are in this table. Need to change the Ash, Ash, Ash etc to be the numbers from your page 39? I will also add some alt's. Some fancier ideas of scrolling etc will have to await by discovery of how to do it. Victuallers (talk) 13:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC) Dinsmoor, Hofkes-Brukker, Felton, Harrison and Cooper.[reply]

THe table below shows the various proposals for how the frieze may have been originally designed to be displayed.

Image	Description	Smith	Ashmolean	Foster	Hahland	Dinsmoor	Hofkes-Brukker	Felton	Harrison	Cooper	BM/Corbett
520	Centauromachy	520	21	05	09	01N	17W	( )	05E	01N	01N
521	Centauromachy	521	18	09	04	22W	15W	16E	03N	02N	19W
522	Centauromachy	522	16	06	04	19W	09E	17E	06E	04N	18W
523	Centauromachy	523	13	01	03	04N	15W	12S	04E	03N	04N
524	Centauromachy	524	19	02	11	05E	11E	14S	07E	10W	21W
525	Centauromachy	525	17	04	10	21W	10E	20E	01N	09W	23W
526	Centauromachy	526	23	07	02	20W	14S	18E	23W	11W	17W
527	Centauromachy	527	14	10	08	02N	08E	15E	21W	06W	02N
528	Centauromachy	528	15	11	06	03N	18W	21E	22W	07W	03N
529	Centauromachy	529	20	03	07	18W	12S	19E	20W	05W	20W
530	Centauromachy	530	22	08	01	23W	13S	13S	02N	08W	22W
531	part of the Heraklean Amazonomachy	531	03	20	16	16W	21W	11W	15W	16E	13S
532	The attack on the Greeks at Troy by Amazons under Penthesilea	532	01	12	15	06E	04E	05W	09E	22E	08E
533	The first casualty of the Heraklean Amazonomachy. note - incomplete	533	02	13	20	11E	06E	08W	10E	18E	11E
534	part of the Heraklean Amazonomachy	534	08	17	19	07E	22W	07W	16W	17E	10E
535	part of the Heraklean Amazonomachy	535	11	22	18	07E	23W	09W	18W	12W	16W
536	one Amazon and one Greek. First part of the Heraklean Amazonomachy (see other picture too)	536	06	15	17	10E	20W	06W	11E	19E	07E
537	The death of Penthesilea at the hands of Achilles after the attack on the Greeks at Troy by Amazons under Queen Penthesilea (note - incomplete picture)	537	04	21	22	12E	19W	03N	08E	21E	09E
538	The attack on the Greeks at Troy by Amazons under Penthesilea	538	12	19	21	08E	05E	10W	17W	23E	12E
539	The attack on the Greeks at Troy by Amazons under Penthesilea	539	07	14	23	17W	07E	02N	19W	20E	06E
540	part of the Heraklean Amazonomachy	540	05	16	12	13S	01N	01N	12S	13S	05E
541	part of the Heraklean Amazonomachy. note - see this picture too	541	09	18	13	14S	02N	( )	13S	14S	14S
542	Heraklean Amazonomachy	542	10	23	14	15S	03N	04W	14S	15S	15S

That is reading it from the northeast corner clockwise. I should add the compass directions too, since the number of slabs per wall is not universally agreed on. Twospoonfuls (ειπέ) 13:47, 21 June 2010 (UTC) Will do Victuallers (talk) 13:56, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

Add some extra columns. Ummm about the North East West thing. If different authors reckon that the number on each wall are different then don't we need to add the NSW or E to the relevant columns? Victuallers (talk) 14:19, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Couple of things. It's Harrison OR Cooper, different schemes. I don't think Smith was proposing anything, just cataloging. Also the Smith numbers aren't coincident with the BM/Corbett arrangement, which needs to be listed separately. Do we really need the flickr numbers? Otherwise, it's looking great. I'll finish it off tonight.

I'm thinking it could be in a separate section with an explanatory introduction, so maybe we don't need the footnotes, any preferences?Twospoonfuls (ειπέ) 14:37, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That seems to work, if you spot any inconstancies let me know. (BTW, the ( ) is for unassigned blocks.) Twospoonfuls (ειπέ) 21:04, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy with what youve done. Looks good. My reason for using footnotes was to try and avoid writing "Ashmolean" etc as a column header. I'm using a netbook and the table is too wide to fit on my screen. However this could be done in an explanation paragraph too. We can also make the numbers disappear and just leave "North" if we want to. I'm going to move it to the main page as its now "good enough" but of course (as always) we can improve. Victuallers (talk) 22:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it could be optimised all all screens, probably wont work on wapedia either. And I expect there's a protocol about this, but I'd prefer to keep it as it is, if possible. Twospoonfuls (ειπέ) 22:38, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

'Start class'

This article seems well written, cited and presented. It is illustrated well with high-quality images so I would say a 'start' tag underestimates this page a little. For me, this page meets 'B' criteria at least. No objections if I amend this? Mtaylor848 (talk) 21:19, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please do, there's still quite a lot to do on this though. 1) A survey of the fragments locations, 2) fleshing out the publication history, 3) explaining the rationale for the different orderings. Also there are problems of iconography that are considerably beyond me, that's something a curator might be interested in addressing? Twospoonfuls (ειπέ) 21:28, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not lost interest - just called away to Hoxne Hoard Victuallers (talk) 12:50, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of frieze to Britain 2A02:C7C:E0AC:3200:7559:B4C0:D429:4228 (talk) 10:29, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]