<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:U.vitruvius_1</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1:U.vitruvius_1</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:base="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><body xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:pdlrefwk:viaf88890045.003.perseus-eng1"><div type="textpart" subtype="alphabetic_letter" n="U"><div type="textpart" subtype="entry" xml:id="vitruvius-bio-1" n="vitruvius_1"><head><persName xml:lang="la"><surname full="yes">Vitru'vius</surname></persName></head><p>architects.</p><p>1. L. <hi rend="smallcaps">VITRUVIUS</hi> L. L. <hi rend="smallcaps">CERDO</hi>
      <hi rend="smallcaps">ARCHITECTUS</hi> is an inscription twice repeated on the arch of the
      Gavii at Verona. (Gruter, p. clxxxvi.; Orelli, <hi rend="ital">Inscr. Lat. Sel.</hi> No.
      4145.) The genuineness of these inscriptions, which has been questioned, is successfully
      defended by Maffei (<hi rend="ital">Veron. Illust.</hi> pt. ii. p. 20, pt. iii. p. 90, <hi rend="ital">Art. Crit. Lapid.</hi> p. 197). There is no precise indication of the time at
      which Vitruvius Cerdo lived ; but it is most probable that he was much subsequent to the
      celebrated writer on architecture, Vitruvius Pollio. We mention him, however, first, in order
      to dispose at once of the question as to the identity of these two architects, which was
      raised by Andreas Alciatus, who attempted to support his belief in their identity by changing
       <hi rend="ital">Pollio,</hi> which is the name of Vitruvius in all the MSS., into <hi rend="ital">Pellio,</hi> which he explained, not as a <hi rend="ital">cognomen,</hi> but as a
      designation, synonymous with <hi rend="ital">Cerdo.</hi> It really seems almost superfluous to
      refute an opinion which rests on such an argument alone; but, to remove all doubt, it may
      suffice to remark, firstly, that the <hi rend="ital">praenomina,</hi> as well as the <hi rend="ital">cognomina,</hi> of the two artists are different, the one being <hi rend="ital">Lucius,</hi> and the other <hi rend="ital">Marcus,</hi> by the unanimous consent of the
      MSS.; secondly, that, whereas Vitruvius Cerdo was a freedman, as we learn from the inscription
       (<hi rend="ital">L. L. = Lucii Libertus</hi>), Vitruvius Pollio was a man of free birth and
      liberal education, as we are informed by himself; and, thirdly, that the arch erected by
      Vitruvins Cerdo exhibits an arrangement which is strongly condemned by Vitruvius Pollio,
      namely, the placing of dentils under modillions. This arrangement belongs to the period when
      the Roman architects had given themselves up to that tendency, of which Vitruvius complains,
      to neglect altogether the more minute precepts of the Greeks. It is seen in the triumphal
      arches of Titus, Nerva, and Constantine, in the portico of Nerva, and in the baths of
      Diocletian. The inscription also refutes the opinion which has been thrown out, evidently as a
      mere guess, that Vitruvius Cerdo was the freedman of Vitruvius Pollio, for then, of course, we
      should have had <hi rend="smallcaps">M. L.</hi> instead of <hi rend="smallcaps">L. L.</hi></p></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>