Chapter IV: Part 4

The style in which the arch and column enter into direct combination with each other, and for which there is no specific name, has at all events some economical recommendations, inasmuch as shorter columns, and fewer of them, are required, than would be necessary for the same height and length according to the trabeated mode. In itself, too, it possesses much ‘capability;’ yet, as is the case with every other style, the merit of the works produced in it depends upon the manner in which it is treated, and the talent brought to it. There is no style of the Art so poetical that the flattest prose may not be made out of it; and hardly any so utterly prosaic as to be incapable of being kindled into poetry by the Promethean torch of geniality—artistic treatment, and, _con amore_, æsthetic feeling.

INTERCOLUMNIATION.

Although Intercolumniation consists only in regulating and determining the spaces between the columns, and consequently does not affect the nature of the composition,—for a tetrastyle, hexastyle, &c., would still be such, no matter how narrow or wide the _intercolumns_ or intervals between the columns may be,—very much depends upon it, with regard to expression and effect. How intercolumniation is regulated in the Doric Order has been already explained at page 20: in that, the distances between the columns is governed entirely by the triglyphs of the frieze, so that there can be no medium between _monotriglyphic and ditriglyphic_ intercolumniation, accordingly as there is either one or two triglyphs over each intercolumn. But in the other Orders there is no such restriction; in them the intercolumns may be made wider or narrower, as circumstances require, but of course under the guidance of judgment and good taste; for what is left _à discrétion_ is not always very discreetly used. Vitruvius and his followers, however, have not cared to trust to individual discretion or indiscretion, but have fixed certain positive and distinct modes of intercolumniation, viz. five,—perhaps out of compliment to the _five_ Orders, to wit:

Pycnostyle, or _closely set_, in which the
intercolumns are one diameter and a quarter, or a
half, in width.
Systyle, in which they are two diameters wide.
Eustyle, or _well spaced_, in which they are two
diameters and a half.
Diastyle, in which they are three diameters.
Aræostyle, or _thinly set_, in which they are four
diameters.

Let us repudiate for Architecture all such formal act-of-parliament legislation, and take pycnostyle and aræostyle as the greatest allowable degree of closeness or of distance at which the columns can be placed; and it follows that between such maximum and minimum any intermediate measure is admissible, and that there is no occasion to fix it positively and arithmetically, and make distinctions which are, after all, only arbitrary. There are a great many matters in design which must be left to the Architect, and intercolumniation is one of them. It is not possible to have precise rules for every thing, neither is it desirable; for if every thing in it could be done by rule, Architecture would forfeit its nature as one of the Fine Arts, and be reduced to a merely mechanical one. What is done by rule can be done by one man just as well as by another.

Excepting the terms pycnostyle and aræostyle, which are useful as expressing the greatest degree of closeness or of openness of intercolumniation consistent with well-proportioned arrangement, the others may be dispensed with. To designate one mode as _eustyle_, _par excellence_, is very much like saying that the proportions assigned to it, viz. 2·30′ or 2½ diameters, are the very best, and all the rest comparatively defective; according to which doctrine, the _monotriglyphic_ mode of intercolumniation usually employed by the Greeks in their Doric temples, and which answers to the character of pycnostyle, is not so well proportioned as what is emphatically called eustyle. Let it be whatever it may, as expressed in terms of the diameter of the columns, intercolumniation should always deserve the name of eustyle, or _well-proportioned_, by being such as satisfies the eye, and contributes to the particular character that befits the occasion and harmonizes with the other proportions of the structure. Pycnostyle, or _close spacing_, carries with it the expression of both richness and strength, the solids or columns being very little less than the voids or intercolumns. Aræostyle, or _wide spacing_,—and _ditriglyphic_ Doric intercolumniation may be called such,—produces an effect of openness and lightness, but also partakes of meagreness and weakness, owing to the want of sufficient apparent support for the entablature,—a very frequent fault in Modern Architecture, where frugality as to columniation has often been allowed to produce a degree of poverty which contrasts very disagreeably with that of the decoration affected by the Order itself. Intercolumniation ought to be made to depend in some measure upon the nature of the composition: a tetrastyle portico, for instance, or a distyle in antis, admits of wider intercolumniation than would be suitable for an octastyle, because pycnostyle, where there are only three intercolumns, would produce too great narrowness of general proportions for a portico.

Hardly is there need for observing, that be their proportions what they may, the intercolumns in a colonnade or portico must be all alike; nevertheless in a Grecian Doric portico there is, as we have seen, some difference, the two extreme intercolumns being there narrower by the width of half a triglyph. There is, besides, another exception from the general principle, for the centre intercolumn of a portico was frequently made somewhat wider than the others, in order to mark the entrance, and the better to display and afford greater space for access to the door within.

One mode of columniation and intercolumniation which remains to be spoken of, is that which has sometimes been practised by Modern Architects, and combines the two extremes of pycnostyle, or still closer intercolumniation, and aræostyle. This consists in coupling the columns and making a wide intercolumn between every pair of columns, so that as regards the average proportion between solids and voids, that disposition does not differ from what it would be were the columns placed singly. Although denounced by some critics, more especially Algarotti, as altogether licentious and indefensible, and although it is not to be especially recommended, or indeed practicable on every occasion, the coupling of columns may, under some circumstances, be not only excusable, but advisable and proper. As is the case with almost every thing else in matters of art, all depends upon _how_ it is done, and whether with or without sufficient reason. That there is no classical authority for it, is no valid reason against it; in the constitution of the ancient temples there was nothing to require or _motive_ it. It may be conceded, however, that coupled columns, forming a prostyle surmounted by a pediment, are objectionable; because where so strong a resemblance to the antique model is preserved in other respects, a departure from it in regard to the disposition of the columns has a disagreeably disturbing effect.

Having gone through the Classical Orders, and explained their elements and constitution, we have performed as much as we purposed, or as we promised. Within the same compass we might, no doubt, have touched upon a great deal besides that belongs to the study of Greek and Roman Architecture, by restricting ourselves to bare matter-of-fact, and suppressing all comment, and so treating the subject drily and superficially. Proceeding upon the principle of _multum haud multa_, we have aimed at nothing more than to initiate the reader in such manner as to excite interest in the subject, and stimulate to further inquiry. Should we have effected that, and should we have disabused him of the prejudices and contracted notions generally entertained in regard to the Orders, or else armed him against them, we shall have accomplished the _multum_—the main point of all. _Much_ shall we have taught, and much will he have learnt, should he now reject the fatal doctrine of the Five Orders, and relinquish it to school-boys and school-masters,—to the plodders who work by pattern, and design by rote and by routine. Much, very much indeed, will have been learnt, by the reader, should he have learnt or have been put in the way of learning, to look upon those various compositions in the three several styles of columniation, which are called Orders, not with the eyes of a Builder or a Mechanic, but with the intuition and the feeling of an Artist; in short, to look upon them as general _types_ to be diligently studied, and then imitated with congenial gusto.

GLOSSARIAL INDEX.

We here make one alphabetical arrangement serve the double purpose of an Index referring to the pages where the respective matters are treated of, and of a Glossary affording explanation, or further remark, as may be, where required. This latter is by no means to be considered a complete or general Glossary of Architectural Terms, but merely as an accompaniment to the present Treatise, and a specimen, perhaps, of what is still a desideratum, namely, a _real Lexicon_—that is, one which explains _things_ as well as terms—of Ancient and Modern Architecture, similar to what has been provided with regard to the Mediæval Styles of the Art.

ABACUS.—The _plate_ or shallow block forming the
uppermost member of a capital is so called for the
sake of distinction, for when a similar one is
placed beneath the base of a column, it is called
a _plinth_. The Doric abacus is spoken of at page
14, and is here shown in a plan of the capital
and architrave; _a a a a_ being the angles of the
soffit or underside of the abacus which overhang
the echinus _e e e e_; and _s s_ the soffit of the
architrave. From this, the relation between the
abacus and architrave, and how much the former
exceeds or projects out beyond the latter, will be
better understood than by the engraving at page 14,
where the capital is shown only in _elevation_.

The next figure is still more indispensable
for understanding the conformation of the Ionic
capital. (See page 32.) Here the abacus shows
itself only in front at _f f_, over the
two voluted faces, the rest being concealed by
the baluster sides _b b_ of the capital,
which extend beyond the abacus, and convert the
general plan into more than a square. Although
the channels and other details of the baluster
sides are omitted, and only their general shape
shown, the engraving explains how those sides are
_reduced_ (p. 33) by being hollowed out or
curved concavely on the plan.

In the next, or Corinthian Order, a similar
curvature is given to the abacus itself on all its
four sides; the capital of this Third Order having
that in common with the First one, that it is quite
regular. One great point of difference between
the Doric and Corinthian abacus is, that in the
former the angles are unsupported, and overhang
the circular body of the capital, while in the
Corinthian they are extended outwards diagonally,
as _a a a a_ in the figure, and supported by
the _caulicoli_ or small volutes, which they
in turn serve to cover. The letters _f f f f_
indicate the rosettes or flowers on the four faces
of the abacus.

ÆSTHETICS—ÆSTHETIC.—A modern architectural writer
condemns these terms as ‘silly and pedantic’ ones
that have ‘lately come into use in the Arts,’
and as ‘useless additions to the nomenclature’
and language of art-criticism. In what respect
‘Æsthetics’ is at all more pedantic than
‘Optics,’ ‘Mathematics,’ ‘Physics,’ and other
words of a similar class now familiar to English
ears,—although they are all of them essentially
Greek,—or more pedantic than a great many
architectural terms which are not only Greek but
altogether technical, it is not easy to divine;
while as to silliness, there seems to be far
greater silliness in rejecting, or objecting to,
than in adopting terms which are not only highly
expressive and convenient, but have found their way
into every European language, from that of Russia
to that of Spain.

The term Æsthetics implies the perception and
the study of those qualities which constitute
the beautiful and artistic, and form the finer
essence of all productions of Fine Art. It carries
with it, therefore, a more exact and philosophic
meaning than the word Taste. In its adjective
form, in which it more frequently occurs, it is
particularly useful, as no adequate epithet can
be substituted for ‘Æsthetic.’ Thus we speak of
the ‘æsthetic sense,’ of ‘æsthetic feeling,’ or
‘study,’ or ‘principles,’ &c.; but we cannot say
the ‘tasteful sense,’ or ‘tasteful study.’ As to
the species of study just alluded to, no term may
be required to designate it, because study of the
kind is generally dispensed with for Architecture,
an historical and technical knowledge of it being
deemed sufficient, without any acquaintance with
those comprehensive _æsthetic_ principles of
the Art which can guide us where technical rules
stop short, and mere rules abandon us to error or
to doubt.

ANTÆ, Doric, 22.

————, Ionic, 40.

ANTEFIXÆ.—Called by some, _Greek Tiles_,—upright
ornamental blocks placed at intervals on the
cornice along the side of a roof, to conceal
or rather terminate the ridges formed by the
overlapping of the roof tiles.

ARÆOSTYLE.—The widest mode of intercolumniation, 78.

ASTRAGAL.—A small convex moulding. The term is applied
chiefly to that which is employed to separate the
capital from the shaft of a column.

ASTYLAR.—From the Greek privative α, and στύλος
(stylos), a column: columnless or without columns,
a term that expresses the absence of columns or
pilasters, where they might otherwise be supposed
to occur.

ATTIC.—This is usually defined to be a small Order
placed over a principal one; from which it might
be supposed that it differed from the Orders in
general chiefly by being applied on a smaller
scale; instead of which it has nothing of
columniation and trabeation in it. There is far
greater analogy between an attic and a stylobate,
or continuous pedestal, both of them consisting
of base, a dado or die, and a simple cornice, and
the difference between them consisting chiefly
in their application, the stylobate being below,
and the attic above the Order. Attics are either
plain or pilastered accordingly as the building
itself is astylar or the contrary; but what are
called attic pilasters are no more than slight
_breaks_ or projections on the general surface,
with the mouldings above and below breaking round
them, without any sort of capital, but just after
the manner of pedestals: their faces, however,
are sometimes distinguished from the intermediate
surfaces by being panelled and otherwise enriched,
as is done, for instance, in the façade of the new
Treasury Buildings: another mode of decoration
is to place either a statue, or else a caryatid
figure, before each break in the front of the
Attic, an example of which occurs in the Strand
front of Somerset House. When introduced only over
particular portions of a façade, such as the centre
or extremities, the Attic is an exceedingly useful
element in composition, inasmuch as it serves
not only to give such parts greater importance,
but also to produce play of outline or sky-line;
whereas, if continued throughout, it is apt to
produce heaviness as well as monotony, and some
degree of feebleness of expression also, its
cornice forming, in comparison with the principal
cornice below, but a very insignificant finish to
the general structure.

AXIS.—An imaginary line through the centre of a column,
&c., or its geometrical representation. Where
different members are placed over each other, so
that the same vertical line, on the elevation,
divides them equally, they are said to be on the
same axis, although they may be on different
planes. Thus, triglyphs and modillions are so
arranged that one coincides with the axis or line
of axis of each column. In like manner, the windows
or other openings in the several stories of a
façade must all be in the same respective axis,
whether they are all of the same breadth or not.

BALUSTER side of Ionic capital, 33.

BED-MOULDINGS.—This may be understood as a collective
term for all the mouldings beneath the corona or
principal projecting member of a cornice, which,
without bed-mouldings, would appear too much like a
mere shelf.

CABLED fluting, 60.

CAPITAL.—The capitals of the columns constitute the
principal and most obvious indicial mark of the
respective Orders. For those of each of the Three
Classes or Orders a certain character conformably
with the rest of the Order is to be observed;
but that attended to, further restriction is
unnecessary. Between several examples, all
decidedly referable to one and the same Order,
very great special differences occur, and there
might easily be a very great many more. Although
the capital itself is indispensable, it is so only
_æsthetically_, and not out of positive necessity.
The necessity is only artistic: decoration of the
kind there must be, but the express mode of it
is one of those matters which should be left to
design, to which it properly belongs. Capitals are
just as legitimate subjects for the exercise of
taste and invention as any thing else in decorative
design. The capital is only an ornamental head to
the column, and therefore admits of being as freely
designed as any other piece of ornament, on the
conditions of its being accordant in character with
the rest of the Order, and of forming an agreeable
transition from the shaft of the column to the
architrave.

CARYATIDES.—Anthropostylar pillars or human figures
(usually female ones) employed instead of
columns to support an entablature. Such figures
ought always to be perfectly free from all
_attitudinizing_, and to appear to support their
burden without any effort. Some very matter-of-fact
critics object to caryatides as being at the best
only beautiful absurdities; as if statues so
applied were particularly liable to be mistaken
for living persons subjected to a more severe
punishment than that of being posted up in a niche,
or on the top of a building.

COLUMNIATION, 68.

CORINTHIAN, or Third Order, 53; Lysicrates example, 55;
Tivoli, 65; ‘Composite,’ or Ionico-Corinthian, 62.

CORNICE.—Doric, 21; Ionic, 42; Corinthian, 61.

CORONA.—That part or member of a cornice which projects
out over and protects the bed-mouldings (see
_Bed-Mouldings_), and throws off the rain from the
rest of the entablature.

CYMATIUM.—A moulding whose section or profile is convex
below and concave above. See _Mouldings_.

DADO.—The general plane surface of a pedestal or
stylobate between the upper and lower mouldings.

DENTELS.—The series of small upright blocks introduced
among the bed-mouldings of a cornice. They are
supposed to be peculiarly characteristic of the
Ionic cornice, but are also employed for the
Corinthian one, beneath the modillions, which
latter are the principal characteristic of the
Corinthian cornice, as dentels alone of the Ionic.

DIAMETER.—The lower diameter of the column is taken as
the _proportional_ measure for all the other parts
and members of an Order, for which purpose it is
subdivided into 60 parts, called minutes, or into
two _modules_ of 30 minutes each; but the module
is quite an unnecessary distinction, not being,
like the diameter, the constant measure of any
one member of the Order, and the use of it merely
adding to the terms of computation. It is surely
much more simple and convenient to write 1·40′,
meaning 1 diameter and 40 minutes, than 1d. 1m.
10′. Being proportional measures, diameters and
minutes are not fixed ones, like feet and inches,
but are variable as to the actual dimensions which
they express—larger or smaller, according to the
actual size of the diameter of the column. For
instance, if the diameter be just 5 feet, a minute,
being ¹/₆₀, will be exactly 1 inch; if 2½ feet, the
minute will be half an inch; or if the diameter be
only one foot, the minute is ¹/₆₀ of a foot, or ⅕
of an inch.

DIE.—See _Dado_.

DIMENSIONS.—In architectural description, some positive
dimensions or approximation to them should always
be stated. Such mere epithets as _large_, _lofty_,
_spacious_, &c., mean nothing,—convey only an
exceedingly vague, general idea according to the
particular notions of those who employ them; and,
like all epithets, they are liable to the most
shameful abuse.

ECHINUS.—A large convex moulding, generally of
elliptical or eccentric contour in the Greek
style, and forming the quarter of a circle in the
Roman. The echinus is the indicial mark of and
constitutes the principal portion of the Doric
capital, the other being the abacus; at least the
term echinus is applied especially to that member
of the capital, although in many Greek examples
its profile has scarcely any convexity, but more
resembles a portion of an inverted cone (18).
In Roman and Modern Architecture the echinus is
usually called the _ovolo_. See _Mouldings_.

ELEVATION may be defined to be the _upright plan_ of a
building, or any part of a building, showing its
exact form and dimensions as they actually exist;
whereas in perspective the forms are shown not as
they exist, or are in themselves, but merely as
they appear to the eye, according to the station of
the spectator. Elevations are of two kinds, viz.
_geometrical_ and _perspective_. In the former,
the whole is projected upon the same _plane_, the
remote parts are shown of their full size, and
distance can be expressed only by shadow thrown
upon the second plane by parts in the nearest
one; whereas Perspective elevation partakes of
parallel perspective, and the parts beyond the
first plane are shown diminished by distance, and
also come into view, although they may be behind
others on the first plane by which they would be
concealed in a geometrical representation. For
instance, supposing a portico to have a second row
of columns in the same axes as those in front,
that circumstance would not be at all apparent in
a geometrical elevation, but could be understood
only by means of the plan, the inner columns
being concealed by those before them; but in a
perspective elevation they would show themselves,
as would also the ceiling and floor.

ENTABLATURE.—The horizontal portion of an Order; the
_trabeation_ or system of beams supported by the
columns. There may, however, be entablature without
columns,—where the latter are suppressed, as on the
flanks of an _apteral_ temple; or omitted entirely,
as in _astylar_ building. For the entablatures of
the respective Orders, see pages 18, 41, 60.

ENTASIS.—A slightly convex curvature given in
execution to the outline of the shaft of a column,
just sufficient to counteract and correct the
appearance, or fancied appearance, of curvature in
a contrary direction (_i. e._ concavely), which
might else take place and cause the middle of the
shaft to appear thinner than it really is. Entasis
is therefore nothing _positive_: it is not intended
to show itself, for were it to do so,—were there to
be any visible swelling,—it would be a deformity;
yet such deformity has been studiously adopted by
many Modern Architects, merely, it would seem, for
the sake of making evident that at all events they
took pains to guard against an imaginary defect.
The subject of entasis has been made one of those
_nugæ difficiles_ which those who can do nothing
else make great parade with. To such, then, be
left all such sublimated transcendental niceties.
If a column only 30 or 40 feet high would appear
thinner in the middle than it really is, unless
there made somewhat thicker than it would be were
its profile a straight line, the same appearance
would take place in any other lofty object, and in
a greater degree in proportion to actual height; so
that a tower of great loftiness, both positively
and proportionally, _ought_—unless entasis were
given it, to look thinner in the middle than at top
and bottom. If such appearance really does take
place, it is one perfectly in accordance with the
laws of vision, therefore no more than a natural
and perfectly proper one. In all such cases the
judgment corrects the eye, and prevents mistakes.
It would, in fact, require a very great stretch of
imagination to fancy what we know to be straight,
and of the same breadth throughout, is not so:
if we can fancy that, we can also fancy that the
further end of a building is not so high as the
nearer one, and that instead of being horizontal,
the cornices slope downwards. So much for the
fuss made about entasis, including that about the
hypothetical curvature in the horizontal lines of
the Parthenon, where curvature was administered, if
administered at all, in an exceedingly homœopathic
ratio.

EPISTYLIUM.—The architrave or horizontal course resting
immediately upon the columns. Hence we should
denote as _Epistylar Arcuation_ that system in
which columns support arches instead of horizontal
architraves and entablatures. See p. 75.

EPITITHEDAS.—A term applied by some writers, by way
of distinction, to the cymatium on the sloping
or _raking_ cornices of a pediment, which
_superimposed_ moulding (as its name implies) was
frequently largely developed, and enriched with an
ornamental pattern.

FENESTRATION, termed by the Germans
_Fenster-architektur_, is, in contradistinction
from columniation, the system of construction and
mode of design marked by windows. Fenestration
and Columniation are so far antagonistic and
irreconcileable, that fenestration either
interferes with the effect aimed at by columniation
with insulated columns, as in a portico or
colonnade, or reduces it, as is the case with an
engaged Order, to something quite secondary and
merely decorative. Astylar and Fenestrated ought,
therefore, to be merely convertible terms; but as
they are not, we may be allowed to invent that of
_columnar-fenestrated_, to denote that mode of
composition which unites fenestration with the
_semblance_, at least, of the other. Employed
as a collective term, Fenestration serves to
express the character of a building or design with
regard to the windows generally: thus we say, the
Fenestration is excellent, or the contrary,—ornate
or meagre,—well arranged or too crowded,—which
last circumstance is a very common fault, and is
destructive both of grandeur and of repose. _Si
quæris exemplum, circumspice._

FILLET.—Any narrow flat moulding or surface is so
termed. Fillets are used either to separate or
finish other mouldings. The intervals or spaces
between the flutes on the shaft of a column are
also called fillets, although not actual members,
but merely the surface left between the hollowed
channels or flutes themselves.

FLUTING.—The collective term for the channels cut on
the shafts of columns. Hitherto this has been
restricted to little more than two modes, viz. with
arrises or sharp ridges, as in the Doric Order
(p. 17), or with fillets. A different mode of
_striating_ the shafts of columns is described at
page 39, and many others might easily be devised.

FRIEZE.—The middle one of the three divisions of an
entablature. It derives its name from the Italian
_Fregio_, ornament, as being that part of the
entablature especially appropriate for sculptural
embellishment, yet, in contradiction to such
signification, the frieze is all but invariably
made a mere plain surface by Modern Architects;
except the Order employed happens to be Doric, and
then triglyphs are introduced as matter of course,
but the metopes left blank, even though ornateness
is studied in other respects, and in parts not
comprehended in the Order itself. For the Ionic
Order, Modern Architects have sometimes employed
the so-called _pulvinated_ frieze (p. 50), that is,
one whose face is curved convexly; but upon what
principle they have appropriated such form of the
frieze to that Order in particular, when it is just
as suitable for the Corinthian, is not said, and
not to be guessed.

HYPOTRACHELIUM.—The necking of a capital introduced
between the capital itself and the shaft of the
column. In the Grecian Doric, the hypotrachelium
is little more than nominal, being marked only by
one or more horizontal channels or incisions, and
the flutings continued through them; whereas to the
Modern Doric capital a distinct necking is given
by the astragal which separates the capital from
the shaft, and marks its commencement. But that is
considered an essential part of the capital, and
as to the Corinthian capital it does not admit of
any necking; wherefore the Ionic one possesses a
great advantage over either of them, inasmuch as it
may have a distinct necking or not, and it may be
either plain or enriched.

INTERCOLUMN and INTERCOLUMNIATION.—The subject of
Intercolumniation is treated of at page 77,
&c. These two terms are generally confounded
together; or rather, the second is very
improperly substituted for the other, contrary
to all analogy of language and distinctness of
meaning. Having only a general collective import,
_Intercolumniation_ can, like _Columniation_, be
used only in the singular. We may say of a portico,
&c., that its intercolumniation is good or poor,
close or straggling, but not that it consists
of so many intercolumniations (according as the
number may be), since such mode of expression is no
better than a solecistical vulgarism. We might just
as well describe a tetrastyle portico as having
four _columniations_, as say that it has three
_intercolumniations_.

‘LYSICRATES’ CAPITAL, 55.

METOPE.—The spaces between the triglyphs of the Doric
frieze, which in the Parthenon, for instance, were
filled in with sculpture; but in modern porticoes
that pique themselves upon being _after the
Parthenon_, they are mere blanks.

MINUTE.—The sixtieth part of the diameter of the column
as a proportional measure. Minutes are written
thus, 10′, _i. e._ ten minutes.

MODILLION.—The small bracket-shaped members or
ornaments in the Corinthian cornice are termed
_modillions_. See page 61.

MODULE.—The semi-diameter of the column, or 30 minutes.
See _Diameter_.

MOULDINGS.—The principal mouldings and the difference
of their profiles in the Grecian and Roman styles
are here exhibited.

Echinus or Ovolo.]

MONOTRIGLYPHIC.—That mode of intercolumniation in the
Doric Order according to which there is only a
single triglyph over each intercolumn, 20.

MUTULES.—The small blocks or plates attached to the
soffit of the corona in the Doric cornice.

NECKING.—See _Hypotrachelium_.

OVOLO.—See _Echinus_.

PEDESTAL.—No constituent or essential part of an Order,
but merely a casual addition to it, 7.

PEDIMENT answers to the Gable in Gothic Architecture,
&c., it being the vertical triangular plane at
the end of a roof which slopes downwards on each
side from its ridge. The Pediment differs from the
Gable in having a _tympanum_, or clearly defined
triangular surface with a horizontal cornice below
and two sloping or raking cornices. See page 24.

PILASTER.—Unknown to Greek Architecture, in which
only antæ (see _Antæ_) were admitted: Pilasters
are employed by the Moderns as substitutes for an
Order in engaged columns, and are, perhaps, even
preferable to the latter, inasmuch as they combine
better and more naturally with the wall to which
they are attached.

PLAN.—A plan may be familiarly described as an
architectural _map_, or map of a building:
therefore only those who cannot comprehend a
geographical or topographical map—a degree of
obtuseness hardly credible—can be at any loss to
understand an architectural one, the latter being
precisely of the same nature as the others, with
this difference in its favour, that it is much less
conventional. To define it more exactly,—a plan is
a _horizontal section_ supposed to be taken on the
level of the floor through the solid parts of the
fabric—walls, columns, &c., so as to show their
various thicknesses and situations, the dimensions
of the several spaces or rooms, the position of the
doors by which they communicate with each other,
and various particulars that cannot otherwise be
explained. Studying buildings without plans is like
studying geography without maps. Nevertheless,
most persons ignore—affect a genteel ignorance of
such vulgar and technical drawings as plans. Plan
frequently costs the Architect more study than all
the rest of his design. Very much mistaken are they
who suppose that convenience alone has chiefly to
be considered. Convenience is, of course, or ought
to be, made a _sine quâ non_; yet it is not so much
a positive merit in itself, as the want of it
is a positive defect. Mere convenience is not an
artistic quality: from that to beauty of plan,—to
striking combinations, and studied effects, and
varied play of arrangement, the distance is very
great. A common-place plan is but a very dull
uninteresting affair. It is no more than what
any builder can accomplish; but a plan replete
with imagination, piquant play, and well-imagined
contrasts, is no every-day matter.

PODIUM.—A continued pedestal; a dwarf pedestal wall;
a closed parapet employed instead of an open
balustrade.

POLYSTYLE.—Having a number of columns. Where columns
occur behind columns, as where a portico has inner
columns, like that of the Royal Exchange, such
portico may be termed _polystyle_.

PORCH.—Any small portico considerably lower than the
main structure to which it is attached may be so
termed, in contradistinction from one carried up
the height of the building, or as high as the
principal cornice.

PORTICO.—For the different plans and denominations of
porticoes, see p. 69.

PROFILE.—The outline of a series of mouldings, or of
any other parts, as shown by a section through them.

PROPORTION.—The magnitude of one part as compared
with some other. The term ‘proportion’ is used
absolutely in the sense of ‘good proportion;’
although every thing that has shape has proportions
of some kind or other. The subject of Proportions
has been greatly mystified by writers who have
laid down certain fixed proportions as the best of
all on every occasion, and as the _ne plus ultra_
of artistic taste. But fixed proportions can be
followed mechanically by every one alike; whereas
it requires ability to deviate successfully from
routine measurement, and apply the _poco piu_ or
the _poco meno_ as the particular occasion or the
particular effect aimed at may require—at least
justify. It is the eye that takes cognizance of
proportions; and the Architect’s own eye ought to
be quite as correct as that of other people.

PROSTYLE.—A portico which projects from the body of a
building, or the rest of a façade. See page 69.

PULVINATED.—A frieze whose face is convex instead of
plain is said to be _pulvinated_, from its supposed
resemblance to the side of a cushion, which swells
out when pressed upon. See page 50.

RAKING CORNICES.—A term, rather unmeaning in itself,
applied to the inclined cornices on the sloping
sides of a pediment.

RUSTICATION.—Although Rustication is not spoken of
in this treatise, the term is here inserted for
the purpose of remarking that what is so called
might frequently be more correctly described
as _Decorative Masonry_, since, so far from
expressing rudeness or coarseness, it may be made
to display the most studied nicety and elaborate
finish. Rustication, no doubt, originated in a
very rude mode of construction; but what was at
first clumsiness and irregularity, was afterwards
refined into an artful and symmetrical disposition
of the stones and courses of masonry, by a similar
æsthetic process to that which converted the
original amorphous stone pillar into the Doric
column. To call such masonry, as some have done,
only _cicatrizing_ and _gashing_, betrays a loss
for both arguments and words. Decorative masonry
is most assuredly not according to Greek taste
or practice; for the Greeks affected to suppress
the appearance of _articulation_ in masonry,
and thereby to give their buildings, as far as
possible, the look of not being _fabricated_, but
_carved_ out of one block of solid material. Yet it
does not therefore follow that the other mode of
decidedly articulating and pronouncing the joints
and courses of the stones is bad, because it is
an opposite one. So far from being unæsthetic, it
possesses much that recommends it artistically,
for it gives _colour_, and produces richness of
surface where there would else be blankness. A
wall whose face is so decorated forms an admirable
ground to columns or pilasters, which it serves
to relieve very effectively, as is exemplified
in the screen façade of Dover House, that little
architectural gem by Holland, which, though by
no means faultless, has more of genuine artistic
quality than any other building of its time in the
whole Metropolis.

SECTION.—A vertical plan of the interior of a building,
showing it as it would appear upon an upright plane
_cutting through it_. Though rarely shown, sections
are almost as indispensable as plans, like which,
they show the thicknesses of the walls; and in
addition those of the ceilings and floors; and show
also _heights_, both of the rooms themselves, and
of doors and windows;—moreover, the forms of the
ceilings, whether flat, or coved, or vaulted. In
one respect, too, a section partakes of the nature
of an elevation, the plane parallel to the line
of section being an elevation of the interior, or
rather consisting of as many elevations as there
are separate rooms or divisions. Sections may be
described as either _furnished_ or _unfurnished_;
the former show only construction and the strictly
architectural parts, wherefore, if the side of
a room happens to be quite plain, without door,
chimney-piece, or other feature, that side or
space will be a blank, or little better. Furnished
sections, on the contrary, exhibit, besides what
strictly belongs to the Architecture and its
decoration, mirrors, pictures, statues, furniture,
draperies, and all other accessories. The number
of sections required depends upon the nature
of the plan, and what there is worth showing.
If the design be worthy of it, there should be
as many sections as will suffice to show every
side of every principal apartment; though it may
not be necessary to repeat the entire section
through every floor. Sections are the _deliciæ_ of
architectural illustration, and, it would seem, far
too precious to be frequently exhibited.

SOFFIT.—From the Italian _soffitto_, a ceiling; the
under surface of any projecting moulding or member.

STYLE, in the sense of a column (from the Greek στύλος,
a column), enters into a great number of useful
compound terms referring to matters connected
with columniation, and which may here be grouped
together, so that any word ending in ‘style’ may be
found here, though passed over in its alphabetical
order. The number of columns in the front of a
pedimented portico is briefly expressed at once by
any of the following terms:

Distyle in antis, two columns and two antæ.
Tetrastyle ” four columns.
Hexastyle ” six ”
Octastyle ” eight ”
Decastyle ” ten ” almost the greatest
number that can be placed beneath a pediment.

As regards Intercolumniation, we
have—Pycnostyle—Eustyle—Aræostyle, 79.
The terms descriptive of the plans and
columniation of ancient temples
are—Prostyle—Amphiprostyle—Peristyle, 69.
Also,
Monoprostyle, a prostyle with _one_ intercolumn on its flanks.
Diprostyle ” ” _two_ ” ”
Triprostyle ” ” _three_ ” ”
To which may be added—
Heterostyle, composed of different Orders, as where one
Order is employed for the centre of a composition,
and another for the wings.
Macrostyle denotes a large Order, that is, one forming
the height of the building.
Microstyle, on the contrary, denotes a lesser Order,
belonging only to some low division of the
building, as for instance, a porch. Thus porticoes
are _macrostylar_, porches _microstylar_.
In Italian composition, microstylar doors and
windows, _i. e._ doors and windows decorated
with small columns, are of frequent occurrence.

STYLOBATE.—That part of a structure on which an Order
is raised, and on which the columns immediately
stand. The term is, however, restricted to what
partakes of the character of a pedestal, and not
to a mere plinth or socle on the one hand, or to a
lower fenestrated floor on the other.

VOLUTE.—The characteristic ornaments and indicial marks
of the Ionic capital formed by circumvolving spiral
mouldings are termed volutes. The small circle in
which the spiral or springs terminate is called the
_eye_ of the volute.

Printed by Hughes & Robinson, King’s Head Court, Gough Square.

ARCHITECTURE OF THE METROPOLIS.

A New and considerably Enlarged Edition,
with many additional Subjects and Plates.

It is proposed to publish, in 20 Monthly Parts,
this very important work, to contain 180 plates and
800 pages of letterpress description of the Public
Buildings of London. Each Part will contain 9 plates
and 40 pages of text, Price 2_s._ 6_d._, to be ready
for delivery on the Magazine day of each month,
beginning with (December 31, 1848) January 1, 1849.

To the Architect, Builder, the Student in Architecture,
and the Amateur, this desirable work for professional
use and study is offered at an extremely small charge,
and published at such intervals as to be convenient for
all classes, entitled

ILLUSTRATIONS
OF
THE PUBLIC BUILDINGS OF LONDON:

Originally edited by the late AUGUSTUS PUGIN,
JOS. GWILT, BRITTON, and others.

NEWLY EDITED AND ENLARGED BY W. H. LEEDS.

Manifold as are the publications which represent the
various structures of the metropolis, this is the only
work which describes them, not _ad libitum_, in
views which, even when perfectly correct, show no
more than the general aspect and locality of each
building from a certain point, and consequently afford
no information beyond mere external appearance—but
exhibits them _architecturally_ by means of plans,
elevations, and occasionally both sections and interior
perspective views. Thus a far more complete and correct
knowledge may be obtained of each edifice, in its
entire arrangement in all its parts and dimensions,
than by pictorial views of them.

As studies for the Architect, the subjects contained
in these volumes strongly recommend themselves,—more
particularly so, as of the majority of them no plans
and elevations are to be met with in any other
publication, which materially enhances the interest
of this collection, and it preserves to us authentic
and tolerably complete records of many buildings
which no longer exist. Among these are CARLTON
HOUSE, illustrated with several plates, including
sections, and a plan of the private apartments; the
late ENGLISH OPERA HOUSE; MR. NASH’S GALLERY, which
has since been dismantled of its embellishments;
THE ROYAL EXCHANGE, and the BOARD OF TRADE.

Among the new subjects introduced in this new
edition will be found:—The New Plan and Elevation
of the BRITISH MUSEUM—NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT—ROYAL
EXCHANGE—ARMY AND NAVY CLUB—NEW CONSERVATIVE
CLUB—REFORM CLUB—MUSEUM OF ECONOMIC GEOLOGY—MANSION
OF THE EARL OF ELLESMERE (Bridgewater House); together
with several Plans of Basements, showing kitchens and
domestic offices, and conveniences not hitherto given.

List of Plates and short abstract of Subjects.

Adam, R., architect.—All Saints’ Church, Poplar.—All
Souls’ Church, Langham Place.—Ancient
Theatres.—Astley’s Amphitheatre.

Beazley, S., architect.—Berlin, theatre at.—Bordeaux,
theatre at.—St. Bride’s Church, Fleet Street;
spire, interior, and altar-piece.—Burton, Decimus,
architect.

Chelsea, church of St. Luke at.—Churches,
remarks on galleries in.—Cockerell, C. R.,
architect.—Colosseum.—Covent Garden, St. Paul’s
Church.—Covent Garden Theatre.

Dimensions of domes.—Diorama.—Domes, table of
dimensions of the principal ones.—Drury Lane
Theatre.—Dunstan’s, St., in the East, tower
of.—Dunstan’s, St., in the West, Fleet Street.

Elmes, Mr., his plan for improving the area around
St. Paul’s.—English Opera House.

Gallery, Royal, and staircase, House of
Lords.—George’s, St., in the East.—George’s, St.,
Bloomsbury, its steeple.—Gibbs, James, architect.

Halls, dimensions of.—Hanover Chapel.—Hardwick,
T., architect.—Hawksmoor, Nicholas,
architect.—Haymarket Theatre.—Henry the Seventh’s
Chapel.—Hosking, Mr.—Hope, Mr.—House of Lords,
staircase, and Royal gallery.

Inwood, Messrs., architects.

James’s, St., Piccadilly.—James’s, St.,
Theatre.—Jones, Inigo, architect.

Knights Templars.—Knights Hospitallers.

Law Courts, Westminster.—Lyceum Theatre.

Mary, St., Woolnoth, church of.—Mary-le-bone
Church, account of.—Mary-le-Bow, St., church,
steeple.—Mikhaelov, architect.—Moller,
architect.—Monuments, at St. Paul’s.

Nash, J., architect.—Newman, J., architect.

Opera House, Italian.

Paul’s, St., Cathedral; description of the former
cathedral; history of the present edifice;
description; compared with St. Peter’s;
monumental sculpture.—Paul’s, St., Covent
Garden.—Peter-le-Poor, St., church of.—Porticoes,
remarks on, by J. B. Papworth.—Pugin, A.,
architect.

Ralph, his opinion on St. Stephen’s, Walbrook;
St. Paul’s, Covent Garden.—Repton, G. S.,
architect.—Royal Amphitheatre, Westminster.

Savage, James, architect; his justification of
the tower of Chelsea Church.—Shaw, J.,
architect.—Smirke, Sir R., architect.—Soane, Sir
J., architect.—Spires, remarks on.—Stephen’s,
St., Walbrook.

Temple Church, history; monuments;
description.—Theatres, remarks on,—Thomond,
architect.

Walbrook, St. Stephen’s.—Walpole, Horace, his opinion
of St. Paul’s, Covent Garden.—Westminster
Abbey.—Westminster Hall.—Willement, T., painted
window by, in St. Dunstan’s West.—Wilson, E. J.,
remarks on spires by; description of Westminster
Hall.—Wren, Sir Christopher.—Wyatt, Benjamin,
architect.

* * * * *

Abraham, R., architect.—Adam, Robert,
architect.—Arch, Green Park.—Ashburnham House.

Bank of England, account of; New Dividend Pay
Office—Basevi, G., architect.—Banqueting
House, Whitehall.—Barry, C., architect.—Barry,
James, painter.—Belgrave Square.—Bethlehem
Hospital.—Blackfriars’ Bridge.—Bonomi, Jos.,
architect.—Bridges, London Bridge.—British
Museum, account of; description of the new
building.—Brooks, W., architect.—Burlington
House—Burton, D., architect.

Carlton Palace.—Chambers, Sir W., architect.—Christ’s
Hospital, new Hall.—Club House, Travellers’.—Club
House, Union.—Club House, University.—Cockerell,
C. R., architect.—College of Physicians,
Warwick Lane.—College of Physicians, Pall Mall
East.—Column, the York.—Corn Exchange.—Cornwall
Terrace.—County Fire Office.—Custom
House.—Cunningham, Allan.

Dance, Mr., architect.—Dodd, Ralph, engineer.

Eaton Square.

Fishmongers’ Hall; former building; new Hall; interior
described.—Freemasons’ Hall.

Galleries, dimensions of various.—Gandy-Deering,
architect.—George’s, St., Hospital.—George’s,
St., Bloomsbury, portico of.—Grecian architecture,
modern, remarks on.—Greenough’s, Mr., Villa.

Holkam House.—Holland, H., architect.—Hope’s,
Mr., House.—Horse-Guards.—Hospital,
Bethlehem.—Hospital, St. George’s.

India House.—Intercolumniation, remark on the term.

Jones, Inigo.—Jupp, R., architect.

Kendall, H. E., architect.—Kent, W.,
architect.—King’s College.

Labelye, architect.—Lewis, J. architect.—Libraries,
dimensions of some.—London Institution—London
University.—London Bridge, the old one; the new
one.

Mansion House.—Mark’s, St., North Audley Street.—Museum,
British.—Museum, Soanean.—Mylne, R., architect.

Nash, J., architect.—Nash’s, J., House and
Gallery.—National Gallery.—Newgate.

Palace, Buckingham; interior; sculpture gallery; state
apartments.—Papworth’s remarks on Somerset House;
on English Villas.—Pimlico Institution, portico
of.—Pitts, W., sculpture by.—Ponz, remark by,
on the Royal Exchange.—Portico, St. George’s
Hospital;—National Gallery; London University;
St. Martin’s; St. George’s, Bloomsbury; Carlton
Palace.—Post Office.—Privy Council Office, &c.,
account of.

Ralph, Mr.—Regent’s Park.—Rennie, J., engineer.
—Roberts, H., architect.—Royal Exchange;
destruction of the building by fire.—Russell
Institution.

Sandby, T., architect.—Saunders, G., architect.—Shaw,
J., architect.—Sion Park Gateway.—Smirke, Sir
Robert, architect.—Smith, G., architect.—Soane,
Sir J., architect, his House and Museum.—Society
of Arts.—Somerset House.—Southwark Bridge.

Taylor, Sir R., architect.—Telford, Mr., his opinion
of the Mansion House. Temple Bar.—Terraces in
Regent’s Park.—Travellers’ Club House.

Vardy, Mr., architect.—Vauxhall Bridge.—Villa, Mr.
Burton’s.—Villa, Mr. Greenough’s.—Villa, Mr. Kemp’s.

Union Club House.—University Club House.—Uxbridge House.

Walpole, Horace, his character of Lord Burlington:
remark on Burlington House.—Ware, S.,
architect.—Waterloo Bridge.—Westminster
Bridge.—Wellington House.—Wilkins, W.,
architect.—Wren, Sir C., architect.

York Column.—York Stairs Water-gate, &c.