Chap. I. THE ORDERS.

85,3
Height of Dinmcter of
Ratio of
Diminution.
Older. Examples- Coiumn in
Englisli Feet.
Column in
English Feet.
Doric Theatre of Marcellus . - . 22-386 3-198 0-200
Coliseum . - - _ . 24-384 2-865 0-077
Ionic Temple of Concord, now of Saturn - 38-376 4-485 0-182
_ Temple of Fortuna Virilis . - - 24-340 3-109 0-125
Coliseum . . - - . 24-518 2-909 0-166
Corinthian Temple of Peace .... 52-400 6041 0-111
Portico of Pantheon - - . . 38-998 4-7'
6
0-106
_ Altars of Pantheon . . - . 11-548 1-4G5 0-133
Temple of Vesta .... 29-226 3-109
0-lU
Temple of the Sybil at Ti: )li 20-254 2-487
0133
Temple of Faustina - . . - 38-376 4-796 0-133
Tcmnle of the Dioscuri . . . 39-975 4-840 0-111
Basilica of Antoninus . . . - 39-442 4-752 0-106
Arch of Constantine . . . - 23-097 3-435 0-117
Interior of Pantheon .... 2!I-3I4 3-642 0-133
Portico of Septimius .... 39-442 3-632 0-125
Composite. Baths of Diocletian .... 37-310 3-553 0-200
Temple of Bacchus ....
n-371 1-443 0-
1 1
1
Arch of Titus - - - . . 17-1(56 2-102 0-117
Arch of Septimius Severus ... 23-097 2-877 117
2543. The recommendation of Vitruvius (lib. iii. c. 2.) to give different degrees of
diminution to columns of different heights has been comliated by Perrault in his notes on
tlie passage
;
and we are, with Chambers, of opinion that l^errault is right in his judgment,
inasmuch as the proper point of view for a cohimn fifty feet high
(Jig.
876. unshaded part)
ou^ht not to be at the same distance as for one of fif.een, the point being removed more
distant as the column increases in height, and therefore the apparent relation between tiie
upper and lower diameters would appear tlie same. For supposing A to be a point of view
whose respective distance from each cf the columns
fg
FG, is equal to the respective
iiciglits of each, the trianglesyAg FAG will l)e similar; and Ay, or Ah, which istlie.same,
will be to Ag, as W, or its equal AH, is to AG: therefore, if de be in reality to be as
DE is to BC, it will likewise be apparently so : 'or the angle dA.e will then be to the angle
l)Xc, as the angle DAE is to the angle IJAC
;
and it' the real relations differ, the ap])arent
iies will likewise differ.
"
When, therefore," observes Chambers, "a certain degree of
diminution, which by experience is found pleasing, lias been fixed upon, there will be no
necessity for changing it, whatever be the height of the colunm, provided the point of view
is not limited; but in close places, where the spectator is not at liberty to choose a proper
distance for his point of sight, the architect, if he inclines to be scrupulously accurate, may
vary
;
though it is, in reality, a matter of no importance, as the nearness of the object
will render the image thereof indistinct, and, consequently, any small alteration iuiper-
eeptible." Our author afterwards adds:
"
It must not, however, be imagined that the
same general proportions will in all cases succeed. They are chiefly collected from the
temples and other public structures of antiquity, and may by us be employed in cl.urches,
palaces, and other buildings of magnificence, where majesty and graiitieur of manner should
be extended to their utmost limits, and wlure, the composition being generally large, the
parts require an extraordinary degree of boldness to make them distinctly perceptible from
the proper general points of view."
SUBDIVISION OF ENTABLATL'KES.
2549. We have spoken of the entablature as the fourth part of the height of the column.
In general terms, its subdivisions of architrave, frieze, and cornice are obtained by dividing
its height into ten equal parts, whereof three are given to the architrave, three to the frieze,
and four to the cornice ; except in the Roman Doric order, in which the whole height of
the entablature is divided into eight parts, of which two are given to tlie architrave, three
to the frieze, and three to the cornice. From these general proportions variations have
been made by different masters, but not so great as to call for particular observation, 'I'liey
deviate but little from the examples of antiquity; and the ease with which they may be
recollected render thein singularly useful.
MODE OF MEASURING THE ORDERS.
2550. Several methods have been used for forming the scale of equal parts, by which the
ortlers are measured; but they are all founded on the diameter of the column at the bottom
of tlie shaft; for those that use the module or semi-diameter as the measuring unit (which
nil have done in the Doric order) must still recur to the diameter itself. The authors have
also usually divided it into tliirty parts, but all concur in measuring by an unit founded
on the diameter. We shall follow the practice of Vignola in describing the orders, that
master dividing the diameter into two equal parts, of which ?dch is the unit of the scale for