« PreviousContinue »
2566. Vitruvius, with more clearness than in the others, describes the Doric order (book iv. chap. iii.). In order to set out its proportions, he tells us, though not giving a direct rule, that its pedestal is composed of three parts, the cymatium or cornice, the die, and the base ; and that the base and cimatium are composed of many mouldings, whose individual proportions, however, he does not give. He assigns no particular base to the Doric order; but, nevertheless, places under half a diameter in height the attic base, whose members are the plinth, small fillet, scotia, and the upper trrus with its superior and inferior fillets, together with the apophyge of the column. He gives to the projection of the base a fifth part of the diameter of the column. The height of the shaft he makes of 6 diameters, and its diminution a sixth part of the diameter. The capital's height he makes equal to half a diameter, and divides it into three parts, one for the abacus and its cymatium, another for the echinus and its fillets, the third for the hypotrachelium. To the architrave he assigns the height of one half diameter of the column, and to the frieze 50 parts of the modu.e
semidiameter divided into 30 parts), including the fascia, forming the capital of the triglyphs. His cornice consists of 30 parts of the module, and its projection 40. The whole height which he gives to the order is, in the measure here adopted, 17 modules and 20 parts.
2567. Palladio makes the Doric pedestal rather less than 2, diameters of the column, dividing it into three parts, the base, die, and cymatium. To the die he assigns nearly a diameter and one third of the column. To the cymatium a little more than one third of the diameter. He uses the attic base to the order, but, for the sake of carrying off the water, turns the plinth into an inverted cavetto (guscio), ending in the projection of the
cymatium of the pedestal. To the shaft of the column he assigns various proportions, directing that if accompanied with pilasters, it should be of the height of 8 diameters, and if entirely isolated, 7 or at most 8 diameters high. He cuts the shaft into 24 flutes, and diminishes it the tenth part of its diameter. The height of his capital is half a diameter, and, like the annotators on Vitruvius, he decorates the neck or frieze, as they both call it, with roses, adding, however, other flowers, and making its projection a little more than a fifth part of the diameter. To the architrave, frieze, and cornice he gives a little more than one fourth part of the height of the column, so that the whole height of his order is in our measure 24 modules and a fraction above 24 parts.
2568. Serlio makes the height of the pedestal of his column a little less than 3 diameters, with its base, die, and cymatium. The height of the die is set up equal to the diagonal of a square, formed on the plinth of the column. The height of the cymatium, according to the strict text of Serlio, should not be less than that of the base; but he altogether omits any mention of its projection. His base is the attic base, to which he assigns a projection of a quarter of a diameter. The column is 6 diameters high, and has 20 Autes. His capital differs only from that of Vitruvius in its projection, which is rather more. The architrave and frieze do not much differ from those already described. The projection given to the cornice is equal to its height. The whole height in our measures amounts to 23 modules and 5 parts.
2569. The Doric order as described by Scamozzi is not very dissimilar to those already described. The pedestal is by him made 2 diameters and a little more than a quarter, with a base, die, and cymatium, and the projection barely a quarter of the diameter of the column, to which he gives the attic base. His column is 7į diameters high, and the dimi. nution a fifth part of the diameter. There are 26 Autes on the shaft, separated from each other by fillets, whose width is one third of the Aute. This author gives three different sorts of capitals for the order : the first has three annulets; the second has only the lower annulet, the two upper ones being changed to an astragal; the third, instead of the two lower annulets, has a cyma reversa. Lastly, above the corona he places a cyma reversa, and in the other parts does not vary much from the preceding authors, especially in the frieze and architrave, except that in the last he uses two fasciæ. To the cornice he assigns the projection of five sixths of a diameter of the column. His whole entablature is a little less than one fourth the height of the column, including base and capital. The whole height of the order in our measures is 23 modules and 8 parts.
2570. In fig. 883. the profile of the Grecian Doric from the Parthenon at Athens is given. Though very different to those we have already described of this order, the resemblance is still considerable. Its character is altogether sacred and monumental, and its application, if capable of application to modern purposes, can scarcely be made to any edifice whose general character and forms are not of the severest and purest nature. The various absurd situations in which the Grecian Doric has been introduced in this country, has brought it into disrepute; added to which, in this dark climate the closeness of the intercolumniations excludes light, which is so essential to the display of architecture under the cloudy skies with which we are constantly accompanied in high latitudes. The diameter of the columns in the original is 6 feet 2:7 inches.
2571. Lest we may be reproached with neglecting to submit to the student in this place (and the remark equally applies to the following section on the Ionic order) more examples of the Grecian Doric, we would here observe that this work is not to stand in place of a parallel of the orders. Nothing would have been easier than to have placed before him an abundance of examples; but they must be sought elsewhere,
Fig. 883. inasmuch as the nature of our labours requires general, not special, information in this respect. We have not, however, refrained in the first book (142, et seq.) from entering into details respecting the Grecian Doric, which we consider much more valuable to the reader than would be the exhibition of a series of profiles of its principal examples. We have, moreover, at that place, suggested some criteria of their comparative antiquity. We do not think the nice copying of a profile into a modern work any other than a disgraceful exhibition of the want of ability in the man, we cannot call him artist, who adopts it, and shall be much better pleased to leave the student in doubt, so that he may apply himself pro re natâ to the matter which calls his genius into play. From what we have said on the orders in Sect II of this Book, (2523, et seq.), relative to the order, and on moulding.
2532, et seq.), it must be quite clear that the variety of every order, keeping to first priniples, has not been yet exhausted, neither is it likely to be so.
TABLE OF THE Parts of the Grecian Doric (Parthenon).
2572. The minutiæ of the Grecian Doric, as we have just observed, cannot be given in
general work of this nature. In its smaller refinements it requires plates on a much larger scale than this volume allows. The reader, therefore, must be referred to Stuart's Antiquities of Athens (original edition), and the publications of the Dilettanti Society, for further information on the subject of the Grecian Doric. All that was here possible was to give a general idea of the order. In the figure, E is the section of the capitals of the inner columns of the temple on a larger scale. DD relate to the principal columns. F is a section of one of the antæ or pilasters to double the scale of the capital. The centre interrolumniation 4 modules , from axis to axis of columns. The principal Grecian Doric examples are — the Parthenon, the temple of Theseus, the propylæum and the portico of the Agora at Athen“: the temple of Minerva at Sunium; the temple at Corinth; of Jupiter Nemæus, between Argos and Corinth; temple of Apollo and portico of Philip in the island of Delos; the temple of Jupiter Panhellenius at Egina, and of Apollo Epicurius at Phigalia; the two temples at Selinus; that of Juno Lucina and Concord at Agrigentum; the temple at Egesta, and the three temples at Pæstum. (See 142, et seq.)
2573. Of the Ionic order there are inany extant examples, both Grecian and Roman ; and, except the debased later examples of the latter, there is not that wide difference between them that exists between the Grecian and Roman Doric. The lonic has been considered as deficient in appearance as compared with the other orders, on account of