in the ancient military art, one who fought with bow and arrows. The English archers were esteemed the best in Europe, to whose prowess and dexterity the many victories over the French were in a great measure owing.

ARCHES-court, the chief and most ancient consistory that belongs to the archbishop of Canterbury, for the debating of spiritual causes, so called from Bow-Church in London, where it is kept, whose top is raised of stone-pillars, built archwise. The judge of this court is termed the dean of the arches, or official of the arches-court: Dean of the arches, because with this office is commonly joined a peculiar jurisdiction of thirteen parishes in London, termed a deanery, being exempted from the authority of the bishop of London, and belonging to the archbishop of Canterbury; of which the parish of Bow is one. Some o- ARCHITECTURE.

Architecture, or the art of building, ought to be considered in a twofold light, as an object of taste, and as a mechanical art. An examination of its principles improves our taste; the practical part contains such instructions as are necessary for the mechanic. Many books have been composed upon the mechanical part, but few authors have attempted to unfold the philosophical principles of the art.

SEC T. I.

OF ARCHITECTURE AS AN OBJECT OF TASTE.

Many ages must have elapsed before architecture came to be considered as a fine art. Utility was its original destination, and still continues to be its principal end. Experience, however, has taught us, that architecture is capable of exciting a variety of agreeable feelings. Of these, utility, grandeur, regularity, order, and proportion, are the chief.

Architecture being an useful as well as a fine art, leads us to distinguish buildings, and parts of buildings, into three kinds, viz. what are intended for use solely, what for ornament solely, and what for both. Buildings intended for utility solely, ought in every part to correspond precisely to that intention: The least deviation from use, though contributing to ornament, will be disagreeable; for every work of use being considered as a mean to an end, its perfection as a mean is the capital circumstance, and every other beauty in opposition is neglected as improper. On the other hand, in such things as are intended solely for ornament, as columns, obelisks, triumphal arches, &c., beauty alone ought to be regarded. The principal difficulty in architecture lies in combining use and ornament. In order to accomplish these ends, different and even opposite means must be employed; which is the reason why they are so seldom united in perfection; and hence, in buildings of this kind, the only practicable method is, to prefer utility to ornament according to the character of the building: In palaces, and such buildings as admit of a variety of useful contrivance, regularity ought to be preferred; but in dwelling-houses that are too small for variety of contrivance, utility ought to prevail, neglecting regularity as far as it stands in opposition to convenience.

In considering attentively the beauty of visible objects, we discover two kinds. The first may be termed intrinsic beauty, because it is discovered in a single object, without relation to any other. The second may be termed relative beauty, being founded on a combination of relative objects. Architecture admits of both kinds. We shall first give a few examples of relative beauty.

The proportions of a door are determined by the use to which it is destined. The door of a dwelling-house, which ought to correspond to the human size, is confined to seven or eight feet in height, and three or four in breadth. The proportions proper for a stable or coach-house are different. The door of a church ought to be wide, in order to afford an easy passage for a multitude; and its height must be regulated by its wideness, that the proportion may please the eye. The size of the windows... dows ought always to be proportioned to that of the room they are destined to illuminate; for if the apertures be not large enough to convey light to every corner, the room must be unequally lighted, which is a great deformity. Steps of stairs should likewise be accommodated to the human figure, without regarding any other proportion; they are accordingly the same in large and in small buildings, because both are inhabited by men of the same size.

We shall next consider intrinsic beauty, blended with that which is relative. A cube in itself is more agreeable than a parallelopipedon; this constantly holds in small figures: But a large building in the form of a cube is lumpish and heavy; while a parallelopipedon, set on its smaller base, is more agreeable on account of its elevation: Hence the beauty of Gothic towers. But if this figure were to be used in a dwelling-house, to make way for relative beauty, we would immediately perceive that utility ought chiefly to be regarded; and this figure, inconvenient by its height, ought to be set on its larger base: The loftiness in this case would be lost; but that loss will be more than sufficiently compensated by the additional convenience. Hence the form of buildings spread more upon the ground than raised in height, is always preferred for a dwelling-house.

With regard to the internal divisions, utility requires that the rooms be rectangular, to avoid useless spaces. An hexagonal figure leaves no void spaces; but it determines the rooms to be all of one size, which is both inconvenient and disagreeable for want of variety. That a cube be the most agreeable figure, and may answer for a room of moderate size; yet, in a very large room, utility requires a different figure. Unconfined motion is the chief convenience of a great room; to obtain this, the greatest length that can be had is necessary. But a square room of a large size is inconvenient. It removes chairs, tables, &c. at too great a distance from the hand, which, when unemployed, must be ranged along the sides of the room. Utility therefore requires a large room to be a parallelogram. This figure is likewise best calculated for the admission of light; because, to avoid cross-lights, all the windows ought to be in one wall; and if the opposite wall be at such a distance as not to be fully lighted, the room must be obscure. The height of a room exceeding nine or ten feet, has little relation to utility; therefore proportion is the only rule for determining the height, when above that number of feet.

Artists who deal in the beautiful, love to entertain the eye; palaces and sumptuous buildings, in which intrinsic beauty may be fully displayed, give them an opportunity of exerting their taste. But such a propensity is peculiarly unhappy with regard to private dwelling-houses; because in these, relative beauty cannot be displayed to perfection, without hurting intrinsic beauty. There is no opportunity for great variety of form in a small house; and in edifices of this kind, internal convenience has not hitherto been happily adjusted to external regularity. Perhaps an accurate coincidence in this respect is beyond the reach of art. Architects, however, constantly split upon this rock; for they never can be persuaded to give over attempting to reconcile these two incompatibles:

How otherwise should it happen, that of the endless variety of private dwelling-houses, there should not be one found that is generally agreed upon as a good pattern? The unwearyed propensity to make a house regular as well as convenient, obliges the architect, in some articles, to sacrifice convenience to regularity, and, in others, regularity to convenience; and accordingly the house, which turns out neither regular nor convenient, never fails to displease.

Nothing can be more evident, than that the form of a dwelling-house ought to be suited to the climate; yet no error is more common than to copy in Britain the form of Italian houses, not forgetting even those parts that are purposely contrived for collecting air, and for excluding the sun: Witness our colonnades and loggias, designed by the Italians to gather cool air, and exclude the beams of the sun, conveniences which the climate of this country does not require.

We shall next view architecture as one of the fine arts; which will lead us to the examination of such buildings, and parts of buildings, as are calculated solely to please the eye. Variety prevails in the works of nature; but art requires to be guided by rule and compass. Hence it is, that in such works of art as imitate nature, the great art is, to hide every appearance of art; which is done by avoiding regularity, and indulging variety. But in works of art that are original and not imitative, such as architecture, strict regularity and uniformity ought to be studied, so far as consistent with utility.

Proportion is not less agreeable than regularity and uniformity; and therefore, in buildings intended to please the eye, they are all equally essential. It is taken for granted by many writers, that in all the parts of a building there are certain strict proportions which please the eye, in the same manner as in sound there are certain strict proportions which please the ear; and that, in both, the slightest deviation is equally disagreeable. Others seem to relish more a comparison between proportion in numbers, and proportion in quantity; and maintain, that the same proportions are agreeable in both. The proportions, for example, of the numbers 16, 24, and 36, are agreeable; and so, say they, are the proportions of a room, whose height is 16 feet, the breadth 24, and the length 36. But it ought to be considered, that there is no resemblance or relation between the objects of different senses. What pleases the ear in harmony, is not the proportion of the strings of the instrument, but of the sound which those strings produce. In architecture, on the contrary, it is the proportion of different quantities that pleases the eye, without the least relation to sound. The same thing may be said of numbers. Quantity is a real quality of every body; number is not a real quality, but merely an idea that arises upon viewing a plurality of things in succession. An arithmetical proportion is agreeable in numbers; but have we from this any reason to conclude, that it must also be agreeable in quantity? At this rate, a geometrical proportion, and many others, ought also to be agreeable in both. A certain proportion may coincide in quantity and number; and amongst an endless variety of proportions, it would be wonderful if there never should be an coincidence. coincidence. One example is given of this coincidence, in the numbers 16, 24, and 36; but to be convinced that it is merely accidental, we need but reflect, that the same proportions are not applicable to the external figure of a house, and far less to a column.

It is ludicrous to observe writers acknowledging the necessity of accurate proportions, and yet differing widely about them. Laying aside reasoning and philosophy, one fact universally agreed on ought to have undeceived them, that the same proportions which please in a model are not agreeable in a large building: A room 48 feet in length, and 24 in breadth and height, is well proportioned; but a room 12 feet wide and high, and 24 long, approaches to a gallery.

Perrault, in his comparison of the ancients and moderns, goes to the opposite extreme, maintaining, that the different proportions assigned to each order of columns are arbitrary, and that the beauty of these proportions is entirely the effect of custom. But he should have considered, that if these proportions had not originally been agreeable, they could never have been established by custom.

For illustrating this point, we shall add a few examples of the agreeableness of different proportions. In a sumptuous edifice, the capital rooms ought to be large, otherwise they will not be proportioned to the size of the building; for the same reason, a very large room is improper in a small house. But in things thus related, the mind requires not a precise or single proportion, rejecting all others; on the contrary, many different proportions are equally agreeable. It is only when a proportion becomes loose and dilute, that the agreeableness abates, and at last vanishes. Accordingly, in buildings, rooms of different proportions are found to be equally agreeable, even where the proportion is not influenced by utility. With regard to the proportion the height of a room should bear to the length and breadth, it must be extremely arbitrary, considering the uncertainty of the eye as to the height of a room when it exceeds 16 or 17 feet. In columns, again, every architect must confess, that the proportion of height and thickness varies between 8 diameters and 10, and that every proportion between these two extremes is agreeable. Besides, there must certainly be a further variation of proportion, depending on the size of the column: A row of columns 10 feet high, and a row twice that height, requires different proportions: The intercolumniations must also differ in proportion according to the height of the row.

Proportion of parts is not only itself a beauty, but inseparably connected with a beauty of the highest relish, that of concord and harmony; which will be plain from what follows: A room, the parts of which are all finely adjusted to each other, strikes us not only with the beauty of proportion, but with a pleasure far superior. The length, the breadth, the height, the windows, raise each of them a separate emotion: These emotions are similar; and, though faint when separately felt, they produce, in conjunction, the emotion of concord or harmony, which is very pleasant. On the other hand, where the length of a room far exceeds the breadth, the mind, comparing together parts so intimately connected, immediately perceives a disagreement or disproportion which disgusts. Hence a long gallery, however convenient for exercise, is not an agreeable figure of a room.

In buildings defined chiefly or solely to please the eye, regularity and proportion are essentially necessary, because they are the means of producing intrinsic beauty. But a skilful artist will not confine his view to regularity and proportion; he will also study congruity, which is perceived when the form and ornaments of a structure are suited to the purpose for which it is appointed. Hence every building ought to have an expression suited to its destination. A palace ought to be sumptuous and grand; a private dwelling, neat and modest; a playhouse, gay and splendid; and a monument, gloomy and melancholy. A heathen temple has a double definition: It is considered as a house dedicated to some divinity; therefore it ought to be grand, elevated, and magnificent: It is also considered as a place of worship; and therefore ought to be somewhat dark and gloomy, because dimness or obscurity produces that tone of mind which is favourable to humility and devotion. Columns, besides their chief definition of being supports, contribute to that peculiar expression which the destination of a building requires: Columns of different proportions serve to express loftiness, lightness, &c. as well as strength. Situation may also contribute to expression: Convenience regulates the situation of a private dwelling-house; and the situation of a palace ought to be lofty. This leads to a question, Whether the situation, where there happens to be no choice, ought, in any measure, to regulate the form of the edifice? The connection between a great house and a neighbouring field, though not extremely intimate, demands however some congruity. It would, for example, displease us to find an elegant building thrown away upon a wild uncultivated country: Congruity requires a polished field for such a building. The old Gothic form of building was well suited to the rough uncultivated regions where it was invented; but was very ill adapted to the fine plains of France and Italy.

The external structure of a house leads naturally to its internal structure. A large and spacious room, which is the first that commonly receives us, is a bad contrivance in several respects. In the first place, when immediately from the open air we step into such a room, its size in appearance is diminished by contrast; it looks little, compared with the great canopy of the sky. In the next place, when it recovers its grandeur, as it soon doth, it gives a diminutive appearance to the rest of the house; paling from it, every apartment looks little. In the third place, by its situation it serves only for a waiting-room, and a passage to the principal apartments. Rejecting therefore this form, a hint may be taken from the climax in writing for another that appears more suitable: A handsome portico, proportioned to the size and fashion of the front, leads into a waiting-room of a larger size, and this to the great room, all by a progression from small to great.

Grandeur is the principal emotion that architecture is capable of raising in the mind: it might therefore be the chief study of the artist, in great buildings destined to please the eye. But as grandeur depends partly on size, it is unlucky for architecture that it is governed by regularity and proportion, which never deceive the eye by making objects appear larger than they are in reality. But though regularity and proportion contribute nothing to grandeur, so far as that emotion depends on size; yet they contribute greatly to it by confining the size within such bounds that it can be taken in and examined at one view; for, when objects are so large as not to be comprehended but in parts, they tend rather to distract than satisfy the mind.

We shall next pass to such ornaments as contribute to give buildings a peculiar expression. It has been doubted, whether a building can regularly admit any ornament but what is useful, or at least has that appearance. But, considering the double aim of architecture as a fine, as well as an useful art, there is no reason why ornaments may not be added to please the eye, without any relation to utility. A private dwelling-house, it is true, and other edifices, where use is the chief aim, admit not regularly any ornament but what has at least the appearance of use: But temples, triumphal arches, and other buildings intended chiefly or solely for show, may be highly ornamented.

This suggests a division of ornaments into three kinds,

1. Ornaments that are beautiful without relation to use; such as statues, vases, bas-relief or alto relievo: 2. Things in themselves not beautiful, but possessing the beauty of utility, by imposing on the spectator, and appearing to be useful; such as blind windows: 3. Where things are beautiful in themselves, and at the same time take on the appearance of use; such as pilasters.

With regard to the first, we naturally require that a statue be so placed, as to be seen in every direction, and examined at different distances. Statues, therefore, are properly introduced to adorn the great stair that leads to the principal door of a palace, or to lessen the void between pillars. But a niche in the external front is an improper place for a statue. There is an additional reason against placing them upon the roof or top of the walls; their rickety situation gives pain, as they have the appearance of being in danger of tumbling down; besides, we are inclined to feel from their being too much exposed to the inclemencies of the weather. To adorn the top of the wall with a row of vases, is an unhappy conceit, by placing a thing, whose natural definition is utility, where it cannot have even the appearance of use. As to carvings upon the external surface of a building, termed basso relievo when flat, and alto relievo when prominent, all contradictory expressions ought to be avoided. Now, firmness and solidity being the proper expressions of a pedestal, and, on the contrary, lightness and delicacy of carved work, the pedestal, whether of a column or of a statue, ought to be sparingly ornamented. The ancients never ventured any bolder ornament than the basso relievo.

With respect to ornaments of the second kind, it is a great blunder to contrive them so as to make them appear useless. A blind window, therefore, when necessary for regularity, ought to be so disguised as to appear a real window: When it appears without disguise, it is disgustful, as a vain attempt to supply the want of invention; it shows the irregularity in a stronger light, by signifying that a window ought to be there in point of regularity, but that the architect had not skill sufficient to connect external regularity with internal convenience.

As to the third, it is an error to sink pilasters so far into the wall, as to remove totally, or mostly, the appearance of use. They should always project so much from the wall, as to have the appearance of supporting the entablature over them.

From ornaments in general, we descend to a pillar, the chief ornament in great buildings. The destination of a pillar is to support, really or in appearance, another part termed the entablature. With regard to the form of a pillar, it must be observed, that a circle is a more agreeable figure than a square, a globe than a cube, and a cylinder than a parallelopipedon. This last, in the language of architecture, is saying, that a column is a more agreeable figure than a pilaster; and for that reason it ought to be preferred, when all other circumstances are equal. Another reason concurs, that a column annexed to a wall, which is a plain surface, makes a greater variety than a pilaster. Besides, pilasters at a distance are apt to be mistaken for pillars; and the spectator is disappointed when, on a nearer approach, he discovers them to be only pilasters.

As to the parts of a column, a bare uniform cylinder, without a capital, appears naked; and without a base, appears too ticklishly placed to stand firm. It ought therefore to have some finishing at the top and bottom: Hence the three chief parts of a column, the shaft, the base, and the capital. Nature undoubtedly requires proportion among these parts, but it admits of variety of proportion. Vitruvius and some of the elder writers seem to think, that the proportions of columns were derived from the human figure, the capital representing the head, the base the feet, and the shaft the body. The Tuscan has been accordingly denominated the Gigantic; the Doric, the Herculaneum; the Ionic, the Matronal; and the Corinthian, the Virginal:—the Composite is a mixture of the Corinthian and Ionic. As to the base, the principle of utility interposes to vary it from the human figure, and to proportion it so to the whole, as to give the column the appearance of stability.

Among the Greeks, we find only three orders of columns, the Doric, the Ionic, and the Corinthian, distinguished from each other by their destination as well as by their ornaments. It has been disputed, whether any new order can be added to these: Some hold the affirmative, and give for instances the Tuscan and Composite; others maintain, that these properly are not distinct orders, but only the original orders with some slight variation. The only circumstances that can serve to distinguish one order from another, are the form of the column, and its destination. To make the first a distinguishing mark without regard to the other, would multiply orders without end. Destination is more limited, and it leads us to distinguish three kinds of orders; one plain and strong, for the purpose of supporting plain and massive buildings; one delicate and graceful, for supporting buildings of that character; and between these, a third, supporting buildings of a mixed nature. So that, if definition alone is to be regarded, the Tuscan is of the same order with the Doric, and the Composite with the Corinthian.

The ornaments of these three orders ought to be suited to the purposes for which they are intended. Plain and rustic ornaments would be not a little discordant with the elegance of the Corinthian order, and sweet and delicate ornaments not less with the strength of the Doric.

With respect to buildings of every kind, one rule, dictated by utility, is, that they be firm and stable. Another, dictated by beauty, is, that they also appear so to the eye; for everything that appears tottering, and in hazard of tumbling down, produceth in the spectator the painful emotion of fear, instead of the pleasing emotion of beauty; and accordingly it should be the great care of the artist, that every part of his edifice appear to be well supported. Some have introduced a kind of conceit in architecture, by giving parts of buildings the appearance of falling; of this kind is the church of St Sophia in Constantinople; the round towers in the uppermost stories of Gothic buildings is in the same false taste.

**Sect. II.**

**Of Architecture as a Mechanical Art.**

**Of the Origin of Buildings.**

Buildings, in the first ages of society, behoved to be extremely rude. The first huts were probably of a conic figure, being the most simple, and best adapted to the materials that could be obtained in such an uncultivated state of society. These huts were formed of branches of trees, covered with reeds, leaves, and clay.

But, finding the conic figure inconvenient, on account of its inclined sides, they changed it into a cubical one, in the following manner: They fixed in the ground several upright trees to form the sides, filling the intervals between them with branches closely interwoven, and covered with clay. The sides being thus compleated, four large beams were placed on the upright trunks, which, being well joined at the angles, kept the sides firm; and likewise served to support the roof, which was composed of many joists, covered with reeds, leaves, and clay.

As men improved in the art of building, new methods of rendering their huts lasting and handsome were gradually invented. They took off the bark and other unevennesses from the trunks of the trees that formed the sides, and raised them above the dirt or stones. The spaces between the ends of the joists were closed with clay, and the ends of them were covered with thin boards, cut in the form of triglyphs, &c.

From this simple construction the different orders of architecture took their rise. When buildings of wood were laid aside, they imitated, in their edifices of stone, the form which necessity had introduced into the primitive huts: Hence the upright trees gave rise to the columns; and the beams, joists, rafters, and strata of materials that formed the covering, suggested architraves, friezes, triglyphs, and cornices.

At what time, or by whom, the Grecian orders were invented, is not certainly known. But the following is the account which Vitruvius gives of them.

Dorus, king of Achaia, and son of Helenes and Opisca, built a temple to Juno in the ancient city of Argos, which happened to be in the manner now called Doric, from the name of the inventor. This manner was afterwards imitated in many other temples in the several cities of Achaia.

The Athenians, about the same time, sent thirteen colonies into Asia, under the command of Ion, son of Xuthus and Creusa. This Ion conquered all Caria, founded many cities, and called the country Ionia. The first temple he built was after the Doric manner. But afterwards he built a temple to Diana of a more delicate structure, and formed upon the proportions of a female body, as the Doric had been on those of a robust man. The capital was adorned with volutes, to represent the curls of a woman's hair; and flutings were cut on the shaft of the column, in imitation of the folds of her garment. This order got the name of Ionic, in honour of the Ionians who invented it.

The third sort of columns, called Corinthian, are said to owe their origin to the following accident:—A young girl of Corinth having died, her nurse placed on her tomb a basket, containing certain trinkets, in which she delighted when alive, and covered it with a tyle to prevent the rain from spoiling them. The basket happened to be placed on a root of acanthus, which pushing out its leaves in the spring, covered the sides of the basket; some of the longest of which, being obstructed by the corners of the tyle, were forced downwards, and curled in the manner of volutes. Calimachus the sculptor, passing near the tomb, was so pleased with the beautiful appearance of the acanthus growing in this manner, that he imitated it in the columns which he afterwards made at Corinth.

Vitruvius treats this story of Calimachus as a fable, and maintains that the Corinthian capital took its origin from an order in Solomon's temple; and it must be acknowledged, that some descriptions in the Bible favour this opinion.

Besides these three orders, said to be invented by the Greeks, two other, viz. the Tuscan and Composite, are thought to have been invented by the Romans. The Tuscan first appeared in Tuscany, before the Romans had any intercourse with the Greeks. The Composite is a mixture of the Ionic and Corinthian. These five manners of building, invented by the ancients, are called Orders, on account of the regularity and beauty of their forms. Of the Parts that compose an Order, and their Ornaments.

The parts that compose an order may be distributed into two different classes. In the first may be ranged all that have any analogy to the primitive huts, and represent some part that was necessary in their construction. Such are the shaft of the column, with the plinth of its base, and the abacus of its capital, representing the upright trees, with the stones on which they were placed, and those that covered them; likewise the architrave and triglyphs, representing the beams and joists; the mutules, modillions, or dentils, which all of them represent the rafters, or some other pieces of timber used to support the covering; and the cornice, representing the beds of materials that composed the covering. All these may properly be distinguished by the name of essential members. The subservient parts, contrived for the use or ornament of the former, and commonly called mouldings, may constitute the second class.

There are eight regular mouldings in ornamenting columns; the fillet, listel, or square; the altragal, or bead; the torus, or tore; the scotia, mouth, or cymatium; the echinus, ovolo, or quarter-round; the inverted cyma, talon, or ogee; the cyma, cyma recta, or cymatium; the cavetto, or hollow. The names of these allude to their forms, and their forms are adapted to the purposes for which they are intended. See Plate XXVII.

The ovolo and talon, as they are strong at the extremities, are fit for supports; the cyma and cavetto, though improper for supports, serve for coverings to shelter other members; the torus and altragal, being shaped like ropes, are intended to bind and fortify the parts with which they are connected: But the use of the scotia and fillet, is only to separate and distinguish the other mouldings, to give a graceful turn to the profile, and to prevent the confusion which would arise from joining several curved members together.

There are various methods of describing the contours of mouldings; but the simplest and best is to form them of quadrants of circles, as in Plate XXVII.

An assemblage of what are called essential parts and mouldings, is termed a profile. The most perfect profiles are such as are composed of few mouldings, varied in form and size; and so disposed, that the straight and curved ones succeed each other alternately. When ornaments are employed in mouldings, some of them should be left plain, in order to give a proper repose: For, when all are ornamented, the figure of the profile is lost.

Of the Orders of Architecture.

An Order consists of two principal members, the Column and the Entablature; each of which is composed of three principal parts. Those of the Column are, the Base, the Shaft, and the Capital; and those of the Entablature are, the Architrave, the Frize, and the Cornice. All these are subdivided into many lesser parts, whose number, form, and dimensions characterize each order, and express the degree of strength, delicacy, richness, or simplicity peculiar to it.

1. OF THE TUSCAN.

The Tuscan (Plate XXIV.) is the most solid and simple of all the orders. It is composed of few parts, devoid of ornaments, and so massive, that its seems capable of supporting the heaviest burden. There are no remains of a regular Tuscan order among the antiques; the doctrine of Vitruvius concerning it is obscure; and the profiles of Palladio, Scamozzi, Serlio, de l'Orme, and Vignola, are all imperfect.

The height of the Tuscan column is 14 modules, or semidiameters, each consisting of 30 minutes; and that of the whole entablature 3½ modules; which being divided into 10 equal parts, three of them are for the height of the architrave, three for the freeze, and the remaining four for the cornice: The capital is one module; the base, including the lower cincture of the shaft, is likewise one module; and the shaft, with its upper cincture and astragal, 12 modules.

These are the general dimensions of the order; the particular dimensions may be learned by inspection of the plates.

In the remains of antiquity, the quantity of diminution at the top of the Tuscan column is various; but seldom less than one eighth, nor more than one sixth of the inferior diameter of the column. The last of these is generally preferred; and Chalmers and others make the same diminution in all columns, without regard to their order.

2. OF THE DORIC ORDER.

The Doric Order, (Plate XXV.) is next in strength to the Tuscan; and being of a grave, robust, and masculine aspect, is by Scamozzi called the Herculean. As it is the most ancient of all the orders, it retains more of the structure of the primitive huts than any of the rest; the triglyphs in its freeze representing the ends of the joists; and the mutules in its cornice, representing the rafters.

The height of the Doric column, including its capital and base, is 16 modules, and the height of the entablature four; the latter of which being divided into eight parts, two of them are for the architrave, three for the frize, and three for the cornice.

In most of the antiques, the Doric column is executed without a base. Vitruvius likewise makes it without one; the base, according to him, having been first employed in the Ionic order, in imitation of the sandal of a woman's foot. Scamozzi blames this practice, and most of the modern architects are of his opinion.

In the profile of the theatre of Marcellus, the frize is enriched with husks and roses; the architrave consists only of one fascia and a fillet; the drops are conical; the metope is enriched with a bull's skull, adorned with a garland of beads, in imitation of those on the temple of Jupiter Tonans at the foot of the Capitol. In some antique fragments, and in a great many modern buildings, the metopes are alternately adorned with ox-skulls and patens. But they may be filled with any other ornaments, according to the destination of the building. 3. OF THE IONIC ORDER.

The Ionic Order (Plate XXVI.) is of a more slender make than the Doric or Tuscan; its appearance is simple, yet graceful and majestic; its ornaments are few; so that it has been compared to a sedate matron, in decent, rather than magnificent attire.

Among the ancients, the form of the Ionic profile appears to have been more positively determined than that of any other order; for, in all the antiquities at Rome, (the temple of Concord excepted) it is exactly the same.

The modern artists have likewise been unanimous in their opinions; all of them, excepting Palladio and his imitators, having employed the dentil, cornice, and the other parts of the profile, nearly as they are found in the Collisicum, the temple of Fortune, and the theatre of Marcellus.

The height of the Ionic column is 18 modules, and that of the entablature 4½, or one quarter of the height of the column, as in the other orders, which is a trifle less than in any of the antique Ionics. In all the antiquities, the base is Attic; and the shaft of the column may either be plain, or fluted with 24 flutings, or 20 only, as in the temple of Fortune. The plan of the flutings may be a trifle more than a semicircle, as in the forum of Nerva, because they then appear more distinct. The fillets, or intervals between them, must not be broader than one third of the breadth of a fluting, nor narrower than one fourth. The ornaments of the capital must correspond with the flutings of the shaft; and there must be an ove above the middle of each fluting. The volutes ought to be traced according to Mr Goldman's method, which is as follows:

Plate XXVII. fig. 9. Draw the cathetus FC, whose length must be 15 minutes, or one fourth of a module; and, from the point C, describe the eye of the volute AEBD, of which the diameter is to be 6½ minutes; divide it into four equal sectors by the diameters AB, DE. Bisect the radii CA, CB, in 1 and 4; and on the line 1, 4, construct a square 1, 2, 3, 4. From the centre C, to the angles 2, 3, draw the diagonals C2, C3, and divide the side of the square 1, 4, into 6 equal parts, at 5, 9, C, 12, 8. Then through the points 5, 9, 12, 8, draw the lines 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 11, 8, 7, parallel to the diameter ED, which will cut the diagonals in 6, 7, 10, 11; and the points 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, will be the centres of the volute. From the first centre 1, with the distance 1F, describe the quadrant FG; from the second centre 2, with the distance 2G, describe the quadrant GH; and, continuing the same operation from all the 12 centres, the contour of the volute will be completed.

Fig. 10. The centres for describing the fillet are found in this manner. Construct a triangle, of which the side AF is equal to the part of the cathetus contained between AF and the side FV, equal to CI; place the distance FS from F towards A, equal to FS the breadth of the fillet, and through the point S draw the line ST, which will be to CI in the same proportion as AS is to AF; place this line on the diameter of the eye AB; divide it into three equal parts; and, through the points of division, draw lines parallel to the diameter ED, which will cut the diagonals C2, C3, and you will have twelve new centres, from whence the interior contour of the fillet may be described, in the same manner as the exterior one was from the first centres.

4. OF THE CORINTHIAN ORDER.

The proportions of this order are extremely delicate. It is divided into a great variety of members, and enriched with a profusion of ornaments. Scamozzi calls it the virginal order; and indeed it has all the delicacy in its make, and all the gaiety in its dress, peculiar to young girls. See Plate XXVIII.

The most perfect model of the Corinthian order is generally allowed to be in the three columns in the Campo Vaccino at Rome, the remains, as it is thought, of the temple of Jupiter Stator.

The Corinthian column should be 20 modules high, and the entablature 5; which proportions are a medium between those of the Pantheon and the three columns. The base of the column may either be Attic or Corinthian: They are both beautiful. If the entablature be enriched, the shaft may be fluted. The flutings may be filled, to one third of their height, with cabling, as in the inside of the Panthéon; which will strengthen the lower part of the column, and make it less liable to injury.

In most of the antiquities at Rome, the capital of this order is enriched with olive-leaves; the acanthus being seldom employed but in the Composite. De Cordemoy, however, prefers the acanthus.

The divisions of the entablature bear the same proportions to each other, as in the Tuscan, Ionic, and Composite orders.

5. OF THE COMPOSITE.

The Composite is, strictly speaking, only a species of the Corinthian; and therefore retains, in a great measure, the same character. See Plate XXIX.

It does not appear that the ancients affected any particular form of entablature to this order. Sometimes the cornice is entirely plain, as in the temple of Bacchus; at others, as in the arch of Septimius Severus, it is enriched with dentils differing very little from the Ionic; and in the arch of Titus, there are both dentils and modillions; the whole form of the profile being the same with the Corinthian, as executed in the antiquities at Rome.

The modern architects have varied more in this than in any other order, each following the bent of his own fancy.

The height of the Composite column, and parts of the entablature, is the same with that of the Corinthian. The foot of the leaves of the capital ought not to project beyond the upper part of the shaft. The different bunches of leaves should be strongly marked; the sprigs which arise between the upper ones should be kept flat upon the vase; and the ornaments of the volutes must not project beyond the fillets that inclose them. The Tuscan Order The Doric Order The Ionic Order The Corinthian Order The Composite Order OF PILASTERS.

Pilasters differ from columns only in their plan; which is square, as that of columns is round. Their bases, capitals, and entablatures, have the same parts, with the same heights and projections, as those of columns: They are also distinguished in the same manner, by the names of Tuscan, Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, and Composite.

The column is undoubtedly more perfect than the pilaster. However, they may be employed with great propriety on many occasions. Some authors declaim against pilasters, because, according to them, they do not admit of diminution. But this is a mistake; there are many instances, in the remains of antiquity, of their being diminished. Scamozzi always gave his pilasters the same diminution as his columns: Palladio and Inigo Jones have likewise diminished them in many of their buildings.

Pilasters are employed in churches, galleries, halls, and other interior decorations, to save room; for, as they seldom project beyond the solid wall above one quarter of their diameter, they do not occupy near so much space as columns. They are likewise used in exterior decorations; sometimes alone, instead of columns, on account of their being less expensive; and sometimes they accompany columns, being placed behind them to support the architraves, where they enter the building, as in the Pantheon at Rome; or, in the same line with them, to fortify the angles, as in the portico of Septimius.

When pilasters are used alone, they should project one quarter of their diameter beyond the walls. When placed behind columns, especially if they be very near them, they need not project above one eighth of their diameter. But, when placed on a line with columns, their projection must be regulated by that of the columns; and consequently, it can never be less than a semidiameter, even when the columns are engaged as much as possible.

The shafts of pilasters are frequently adorned with flutings, in the same manner as those of columns; the plan of which may be a trifle more than a semicircle. Their number must be seven on each face, which makes them nearly of the same size with those of columns. The intervals, or fillets, must either be one third or one fourth of the fluting in breadth.

The capitals of pilasters are profiled nearly in the same manner as those of columns.

OF PERSIANS AND CARYATIDES.

Besides columns and pilasters, it is sometimes customary to employ representations of the human figure, to support entablatures in buildings. The male figures are called Persians; and the female, Caryatids, or Caryatides. The ancients made frequent use of Persians and Caryatides, and delighted in diversifying them a thousand ways. The modern artists have followed their example; and there is a great variety of compositions of this kind to be met with in different parts of Europe.

Indecent attitudes, distorted features, and all monstrous productions, ought to be avoided, of which there are many examples in Gothic buildings. On the contrary, the attitudes should be simple and graceful, the countenance always pleasing, though varied and strongly marked agreeable to the nature of the object represented.

The Caryatides, or female figures, should never much exceed the human size. But the Persians, or male figures, may be of any size; and the larger the better, as they will strike the beholder with the greater awe and astonishment. Persians may be used with propriety in arcades, galleries of armour, &c., under the figures of captives, heroic virtues, &c. Their entablature ought to be Doric, and bear the same proportion to them as to columns of the same height. The entablature for Caryatides ought to be either Ionic or Corinthian, according as the character of the figures is more or less delicate.

Termini are sometimes employed, instead of Persians or Caryatides, to support the entablatures of monuments, chimney-pieces, and such like compositions. These figures owe their origin to the stones used by the ancients to mark the limits of particular possessions. Numa Pom- pilius, to render these inviolable, consecrated the terminus into a deity, and instituted festivals and sacrifices to his honour. In a short time, what was formerly only large upright stones, were represented in human shape; and afterwards introduced as ornaments to temples and other buildings. The termini are now principally used as ornaments for gardens and fields.

OF PEDESTALS.

Most writers consider the Pedestal as a necessary part of the order, without which it is not complete. It is indeed a matter of little importance whether it be considered in that light, or as a distinct composition: We shall therefore treat of a pedestal as a distinct body, having no more connection with the order than an Attic, a base, or any other part with which it may on some occasions be associated.

A pedestal consists of three principal parts; the base, the dye, and the cornice. The dye is always nearly of the same figure; being constantly either a cube or a parallelopipedon: But the base and cornice are varied and adorned with more or fewer mouldings, according to the simplicity or richness of the composition in which the pedestal is employed. Hence pedestals are, like columns, distinguished by the names of Tuscan, Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, and Composite.

Some authors are adverse to pedestals, and compare a column raised on a pedestal to a man mounted on stilts; imagining that they were introduced merely for necessity, and for want of columns of a sufficient length. It is indeed true, that the ancients often made use of artifices to lengthen their columns; as appears by some that are in the Baptistery of Constantine at Rome; the shafts of which being too short for the building, were lengthened and joined to their bases by an undulated sweep, adorned with acanthus leaves. Nevertheless, there are many occasions where pedestals are evidently necessary; and some in which the order, were it not so raised, would lose Jose much of its beautiful appearance. Thus, in the insides of churches, if the columns that support the vault were placed immediately on the ground, the seats would hide their bases, and a good part of their shafts; and, in the theatres of the ancients, if the columns of the scene had been placed immediately on the stage, the actors would have hid a part of them from the audience. In interior decorations, a pedestal diminishes the parts of the order, which otherwise might perhaps appear too clumsy, and hath the advantage of placing the column in a more favourable view, by raising its base nearer the level of the spectator's eye. In a second order of arcades, there is no avoiding pedestals; as without them it is impossible to give the arches any tolerable proportion.

With regard to the proportion that pedestals ought to bear to that of the columns they support, it is by no means fixed. Both the ancients and moderns vary greatly on this head. Vignola's proportions are generally reckoned the best. He makes his pedestals, in all the orders, of the same height, viz., one third of the column; and as their breadth of course increases or diminishes in the same degree as the diameters of their respective columns do, the character of the order is always preserved, which, according to any other method, is impossible.

As to the divisions of the pedestal; if the whole height be divided into nine parts, one of them may be given to the height of the cornice, two to the base, and the six remaining to the dye. The breadth of the dye is always made equal to that of the plinth of the column. The projection of the cornice may be made equal to its height; and the base being divided into three parts, two of them will be for the height of the plinth, and one for the mouldings, whose projection must be less than that of the cornice. These measures are common to all pedestals. See Plate XXX.

OF INTERCOLUMNNIATIONS.

Columns are either engaged, or insulated; and, when insulated, are either very near the wall, or at a considerable distance from it. Engaged columns, or such as are near the walls of a building, are not limited in their intercolumniations, as these depend on the breadths of the arches, windows, niches, or other decorations placed between the columns. But columns that are entirely detached, and perform alone the office of supporting the entablature, as in peristyles, porches, and galleries, must be near each other, for the sake both of real and apparent solidity.

The intercolumniations among the ancients were various. Those used in the Ionic and Corinthian orders were the pycnofyle, of which the interval was equal to one diameter and a half of the column; the sytle, whose interval was equal to two diameters; the eustyle, to two and a quarter; the diastyle to three, and the araeofyle to four. In the Doric order, they used other intercolumniations, regulating them by the triglyphs, one of which was always placed directly over the middle of each column; so that they were either sytle, monotriglyph, of one diameter and a half; diastyle, of two diameters and three quarters; or araeofyle, of four diameters; and the Tuscan intervals were very wide, some of them being above seven diameters, which was very practicable, as the architraves were of wood.

Among these different intercolumniations, the pycnofyle and sytle are too narrow; for although the ancients made frequent use of them, that ought rather to be ascribed to necessity than choice. For, as the architraves were composed of single stones, extending from the middle of one column to the middle of another, it would have been difficult, especially in large buildings, to find blocks of a sufficient length for diastyle intervals. With regard to the araeofyle and Tuscan intercolumniations, they are by much too wide, and can only be used in rustic buildings, where the architraves are of wood; neither is the diastyle sufficiently solid in large compositions. The eustyle is a medium between the narrow and broad intervals; and, being at the same time both spacious and solid, hath been preferred to any of the rest by the ancients as well as the moderns.

Vignola observed nearly the same proportion in all his intercolumniations; which practice, though condemned by several writers, is certainly preferable to any other; as it preserves the character of each order, and maintains in all of them an equal degree of real solidity. Setting aside therefore the pycnofyle and sytle dispositions on account of their want of space, and the araeofyle for its deficiency in point of strength, it may be established, that the diastyle and eustyle intercolumniations, (the latter of which, on most occasions, ought to have the preference), may be employed in all the orders without distinction, excepting the Doric; in which the most perfect interval is ditriglyph; neither the monotriglyph, nor the araeofyle, being to be suffered but in cases of necessity.

Sometimes, on account of the windows, doors, niches, and other decorations, which correspond with the intercolumniations of the peristyle, or gallery, it is not possible to make the intervals so narrow as eustyle, or even as diastyle: Wherefore, the moderns, authorized by some few examples of the ancients, where grouped columns are employed, have invented a manner of disposing them, called by Perrault araeofyle, which admits of a larger interval, without any detriment to the apparent solidity of the building. This kind of disposition is composed of two sytle intercolumniations; the column that separates them being approached towards one of those at the extremities, sufficient room only being left between them for the projection of the capitals; so that the great space is three diameters and a half wide, and the little one half a diameter.

In peristyles, galleries, or porticos, all the intercolumniations must be equal: But in a logia, or porch, the middle interval may be broader than the others, by a triglyph or modillion, or three or four dentils; unless the columns at the angles be coupled, or grouped with pilasters; in which case, all the intervals should be of the same dimensions.

When buildings are very small, as is frequently the case in temples and other inventions used for ornamenting gardens, the intercolumniations may be broader, in proportion to the diameter of the columns, than usual; because, cause, when they are nearer each other than three feet, there is hardly room for a bulky person to pass between them.

OF ARCHES.

Arches are not so magnificent as colonnades; but they are more solid, and less expensive. They are proper for triumphal entrances, gates of cities, of palaces, of gardens, and of parks; and, in general, for all openings that require an extraordinary breadth.

There are various manners of adorning arches. Sometimes their piers are rusticated; sometimes they are adorned with pilasters, termini, or caryatides; and sometimes they are made sufficiently broad to admit niches, or windows. The circular part of the arch is either surrounded with rustic key-stones, or with an archivolt enriched with mouldings; which, in the middle, is sometimes interrupted by a console, a mask, serving at the same time as a key to the arch, and as a support to the architrave of the order. The archivolt is sometimes supported by an impost, at the head of the pier; and, at others, by columns placed on each side of it, with a regular entablature, or architrave cornice. There are likewise instances of arcades without piers, the arches being turned on single columns, as in the temple of Faunus at Rome, &c. This practice, however, ought to be seldom imitated, as it is neither solid nor handsome.

When arches are large, the key-stone should never be omitted, but cut in the form of a console, and carried close under the soffit of the architrave, which, on account of its extraordinary length, requires a support in the middle. The imposts of arches should never be omitted; at least, if they be, a platform ought to supply their place. If columns are employed without pedestals in arcades, they should always be raised on a plinth. In all arches, the circular part ought not to spring immediately from the impost, but take its rise at such a distance above it, as is necessary in order to have the whole curve seen at the proper point of view.

The void or aperture of arches should never be higher, nor much lower, than double their breadth; the breadth of the pier should seldom exceed two thirds, nor be less than one third, of the breadth of the arch; and the angular pier ought to be broader than the others, by one half, one third, or one fourth; the impost should not be more than one seventh, nor less than one ninth of the aperture; and the archivolt must not be more than one eighth, nor less than one tenth of it. The breadth of the console must, at the bottom, be equal to that of the archivolt; and its sides must be drawn from the centre of the arch: The length of it must not be less than one and a half of its smallest breadth, nor more than double. The thickness of the pier depends on the breadth of the portico; for it must be strong enough to resist the pressure of its vault. But, with regard to the beauty of the building, it should not be less than one quarter of the breadth of the arch, nor more than one third. These are the general dimensions of arches.

OF ORDERS ABOVE ORDERS.

When, in a building, two or more orders are employed, one above another, the laws of solidity require, the strongest should be placed lowest. Hence the Tuscan must support the Doric, the Doric the Ionic, the Ionic the Composite or Corinthian, and the Composite the Corinthian.

This rule, however, is not always strictly adhered to. Most authors place the Composite above the Corinthian. There are likewise examples where the same order is repeated, as in the theatre of Statilius Taurus, and the Coliseum; and others, where an intermediate order is omitted, and the Ionic placed on the Tuscan, or the Corinthian on the Doric. But none of these practices ought to be imitated.

In placing columns above one another, the axis of all the columns ought to correspond, or be in the same perpendicular line, at least in front.

With regard to the proportions of columns placed above each other, Scamozzi's rule, That the lower diameter of the superior column should constantly be equal to the upper diameter of the inferior one, is universally esteemed the best, and gives all the columns the appearance of one long tapering tree, cut into several pieces. According to this rule, the Doric column will be to the Tuscan, as $13\frac{1}{2}$ to $14$; the Ionic to the Doric, as $15$ to $16$; the Composite or Corinthian to the Ionic, as $16\frac{1}{2}$ to $18$; and the Corinthian to the Composite, as $16\frac{1}{2}$ to $20$.

In Britain there are few examples of more than two stories of columns in the same aspect: And, though in Italy, and other parts of Europe, we frequently meet with three, and sometimes more; yet it is a practice by no means to be imitated; for there is no possibility of avoiding many striking inconsistencies, or of preserving the character of each order in its intercolumnial decorations.

OF BASEMENTS AND ATTICS.

Instead of employing several orders one above the other in a composition, the ground-floor is sometimes made in the form of a basement, on which the order that decorates the principal story is placed. The proportion of these basements is not fixed, but depends on the nature of the rooms on the ground-floor. In the palace of the Porti in Vicenza, the height of the basement is equal to that of the order. In some buildings, its height exceeds two thirds of that of the order; and in others only half the height of the order. It is not, however, advisable to make the basement higher than the order it supports; neither should it be lower than one half of the order.

The usual method of decorating basements is with rustics of different kinds. The best, where neatness and finishing is aimed at, are such as have a smooth surface. Their height, including the joint, should never be less, nor much more, than half a module of the order placed on the basement. Their figure may be from a square to a sesquialtera; and their joints may be either square or chamfered. The square ones should not be broader than one eighth of the height of the rustic, nor narrower than one tenth; and their depth must be equal to their breadth; those that are chamfered, must form a rectangle; and the breadth... breadth of the whole joint may be from one fourth to one third of the height of the flat surface of the rustic.

Instead of a second order, it is sometimes usual to crown the first with an Attic Story. These Attics should never exceed in height one third of the height of the order on which they are placed, nor be less than one quarter of it. Their figure is that of a pedestal: The base, dye, and cornice, of which they are composed, may bear the same proportions to each other as those of pedestals do; and the base and cornice may be composed of the same mouldings as those of pedestals. Sometimes the Attic is continued throughout; at others, it projects, and forms a pilaster over each column of the order. The breadth of this pilaster is seldom made narrower than the upper diameter of the column below it, and never broader. Its projection may be equal to one quarter of its breadth.

OF PEDIMENTS.

Pediments most probably owe their origin to the inclined roofs of the primitive huts. Among the Romans, they were used only as coverings to their sacred buildings, till Caesar obtained leave to cover his house with a pointed roof, after the manner of temples. In the remains of antiquity we meet with two kinds of pediments, the triangular and circular. The former of these are promiscuously applied to cover small or large bodies: But the latter being of a heavier figure, are never used but as coverings to doors, niches, windows, or gates.

As a pediment represents the roof, it should never be employed but as a finishing to the whole composition.

The ancients introduced but few pediments into their buildings, usually contenting themselves with a single one to adorn the middle or principal part. But some of the moderns, and particularly the Italians, have been so immoderately fond of them, that their buildings frequently consist of almost nothing else.

The girdle being a necessary part in the construction of a roof, it is an impropriety to intermit the horizontal entablature of a pediment, by which it is represented, to make room for a niche, an arch, or a window.

In regular architecture, no other form of pediments can be admitted, besides the triangular and circular. Both of them are beautiful: and when a considerable number of pediments are introduced, as when a range of windows are adorned with them, these two figures may be used alternately, as in the niches of the Pantheon, and in those of the temple of Diana at Nîmes.

The proportion of pediments depends upon their size; for the same proportions will not do in all cases. When the base of the pediment is short, its height must be increased; and when the pediment is long, the height must be diminished. The best proportion for the height is from one fifth to one fourth of the base, according to the extent of the pediment, and the character of the body it covers. The materials of the roof must also be attended to; for if it be covered with tiles, it will be necessary to raise it more than one quarter of the base, as was the custom of the ancients in their Tuscan temples.

The tympan is always on a line with the front of the frieze; and, when large, admits of various ornaments.

OF BALLUSTRADES.

Ballustrades are sometimes of real use in buildings; and at other times they are only ornamental. Such as are intended for use, as when they are employed in stair-cases, before windows, or to inclose terraces, &c., must always be nearly of the same height; never exceeding three feet and a half, nor ever less than three. But those that are principally designed for ornament, as when they finish a building, should be proportioned to the architecture they accompany; and their height ought never to exceed four fifths of the height of the entablature on which they are placed; nor should it ever be less than two thirds thereof, without counting the zoccolo, or plinth, the height of which must be sufficient to leave the whole ballustrade exposed to view.

The best proportion for ballustrades is to divide the whole given height into thirteen equal parts; eight of these for the height of the balluster, three for the base, and two for the cornice or rail; or into fourteen, (if it be required to make the balluster less), giving eight parts to the balluster, four to the base, and two to the rail. One of these parts may be called a module; and, being divided into nine minutes, may serve to determine the dimensions of the particular members.

In ballustrades, the distance between two ballusters should not exceed half the diameter of the balluster measured in its thickest part, nor be less than one third of it.

The breadth of the pedestals, when they are placed on columns or pilasters, is regulated by them; the dye never being made broader than the top of the shaft, nor much narrower: and when there are neither columns nor pilasters in the front, the dye should not be much lower than a square, and seldom higher. On stairs, or any other inclined planes, the same proportions are to be observed as on horizontal ones.

OF GATES, DOORS, AND PIERS.

There are two kinds of entrances, viz. doors and gates. The former serve only for the passage of persons on foot; but the latter likewise admit horsemen and carriages. Doors are used as entrances to churches, and other public buildings, to common dwelling-houses, and apartments: And gates serve for inlets to cities, fortresses, parks, gardens, palaces, &c. The apertures of gates being always wide, they are generally made in the form of an arch, that figure being the strongest. But doors, which are generally of small dimensions, are commonly parallelograms, and closed horizontally.

The general proportion for the apertures, both of gates and doors, whether arched or square, is, that the height be about double the breadth.

The usual ornaments of gates consist of columns, pilasters, entablatures, pediments, rustics of different kinds, imposts, archivolts, &c.; and the most common method of adorning doors is with an architrave, for rounding the the sides and top of the aperture, on which are placed a regular frieze and cornice. Sometimes the cornice is supported by a couple of consoles placed on each side of the door; and sometimes, besides an architrave, the aperture is adorned with columns, pilasters, caryatides, or termini; and a regular entablature with a pediment.

Inside-doors, however small the building may be, should never be narrower than two feet nine inches; nor should they ever, in private houses, exceed three feet six inches in breadth, which is more than sufficient to admit the bulkiest person. Their height should at least be six feet three or four inches; otherwise a tall person cannot pass without stooping. In churches, palaces, &c., where there is a constant ingress and egress of people, the apertures must be larger. The smallest breadth that can be given to a gate is $8\frac{1}{2}$ or 9 feet, which is but just sufficient for the passage of a coach.

Plate XXXI. Fig. 1. Is a rustic door, composed by the celebrated Vignola, in which the aperture occupies two thirds of the whole height, and one half of the whole breadth; the figure of it being a double square. The rustics may be either smooth or hatched; their joints must form a rectangle, and the breadth of each joint may be one third, or two sevenths, of the vertical surface of a rustic. The joints of the claveaux, or key-stones, must be drawn to the summit of an equilateral triangle, whose base is the top of the aperture. The architrave surrounding the aperture may be composed either of a large ogee and fillet, or of a plat-band and fillet. Its whole breadth must be one tenth of the breadth of the aperture; the remaining part of each pier being for the rustics. The entablature is Tuscan: The cornice is to be one fifteenth of the whole height of the door; and what remains below it being divided into twenty-one equal parts, the two uppermost of them will be for the frieze and architrave, and the remaining nineteen for the rustics and plinth at the foot of the door.

Fig. 2. Is a disposition of Michael Angelo's. The windows of the Capitol at Rome are of this kind; and Sir Christopher Wren hath executed doors of the same kind under the semicircular porches in the flanks of St Paul's. The figure of the aperture may be a double square; the architrave one fifth of the breadth of the aperture; and the whole entablature one quarter of its height. The front of the pilasters or columns, on each side, must be on a line with the fascia of the architrave; and their breadth must be a demi-fidiameter.

Fig. 3. Is likewise a design of Vignola's. It is of the Corinthian order, and executed in the Cancelleria at Rome. The height is equal to double its breadth; and the whole ornament at the top is equal to one third of the height of the aperture. The architrave is in breadth one fifth of the breadth of the aperture; and the pilasters that support the consoles, are half as broad as the architrave. The whole is well imagined, but rather heavy; and it will be best to reduce the architrave to one sixth of the aperture, diminishing the entablature proportionally.

Fig. 4. Is a design of Serlio's. The aperture may be either twice as high as broad, or a trifle less. The diameter of the columns may be equal to one quarter of the breadth of the aperture; and their height may be from eight diameters to eight and a half. The entablature must be somewhat less than one quarter of the height of the columns; and the height of the pediment may be one quarter of its base.

Fig. 5. Is a door in the salon of the Farnese at Rome, designed by Vignola. The aperture forms a double square. The entablature is equal to three sevenths of its height, the architrave being one of these sevenths; and the whole ornament on the sides, consisting of the architrave and pilasters, is equal to two sevenths of the breadth of the aperture: The cornice is Composite, enriched with mutules and dentils; and the frieze is adorned with a festoon of laurel.

Fig. 6. Is copied from a door at Florence, said to be a design of Cigoli's. The height of the aperture is a trifle more than twice its breadth. It is arched; and the impost is equal to half a diameter. The columns are Ionic, somewhat above nine diameters high; and their shafts are garnished each with five rustic cintrures. The entablature is less than one quarter of the column; and the breadth of the tablet, in which there is an inscription, is equal to the breadth of the aperture.

OF WINDOWS.

The first consideration with regard to windows, is their size, which varies according to the climate, the destination of the building, &c. In Britain, the windows of the smallest private houses are commonly from 3 to 3½ feet broad; and being generally twice their breadth in height, or somewhat more, in the principal apartments, they generally rise to within a foot or two of the ceilings of the rooms, which are frequently no higher than 10 feet, and at most 12 or 13. But, in more considerable houses, the apartments are from 15 to 20 feet high, and sometimes more; and in these the windows are from 4 to 5 and 5½ feet broad, and high in proportion. These dimensions are sufficient for dwelling-houses of any size in this country: when they are larger, they admit too much of the cold air in winter. But churches, and other buildings of that kind, may have larger windows, proportioned to the size of the structures.

The proportions of the apertures of windows depend upon their situation. Their breadth in all the stories must be the same; but the different heights of the apartments make it necessary to vary the height of the windows likewise. In the principal floor, it may be from $\frac{2}{3}$ of the breadth to $\frac{3}{4}$, according as the rooms have more or less elevation. In the ground-story, where the apartments are lower, the apertures of the windows seldom exceed a double square; and, when they are in a rustic basement, they are frequently made much lower. The height of the windows of the second floor may be from $\frac{1}{2}$ of their breadth to $\frac{3}{4}$; and Attics and Mezzanines may be either a perfect square, or somewhat lower.

The windows of the principal floor are generally most enriched. The simplest method of adorning them is, with an architrave surrounding the aperture, and crowned with a frieze and cornice. The windows of the ground-floor are sometimes left entirely plain, without any any ornament; and at others they are surrounded with rustics, or a regular architrave with a frieze and cornice. Those of the second floor have generally an architrave carried entirely round the aperture; and the same is the method of adorning Attic and Mezzanine windows. But the two last have seldom either frieze or cornice; whereas the second-floor windows are often crowned with both.

The breadth of all the windows on the same floor should be on the same level, and raised above the floor from two feet nine inches to three feet six inches at the very most. When the walls are thick, the breasts should be reduced under the apertures, for the convenience of looking out. In France, the windows are frequently carried quite down to the floor. When the building is surrounded with gardens, or other beautiful objects, this method renders the rooms exceeding pleasant.

The interval between the apertures of windows de- pends in a great measure on their enrichments. The breadth of the aperture is the least distance that can be between them; and twice that breadth should be the lar- gest in dwelling-houses; otherwise the rooms will not be sufficiently lighted. The windows in all the stories of the same aspect must be placed exactly above one another.

Plate XXXII. Fig. 1. Is a design of P. Lefcot, ab- bot of Clagny, executed in the old Louvre at Paris. The apertures may be a double square, or a trifle more; the architrave from one sixth to one seventh of the breadth of the aperture: The pilaster is equal to that breadth, when the architrave is narrow; or less, by one quarter, or one fifth, when it is broad. The whole entablature should not exceed one quarter of the height of the a- perature, nor be much lower. The consoles may be equal in length to half the breadth of the aperture at most, and to one third of it at least.

Fig. 2. Is a design of Palladio's, executed at the Chiericato in Vincenza: Its proportions are not much different from the following. The plat-band that sup- ports the window is equal to the breadth of the archi- trave.

Fig. 3. Is likewise a design of Palladio's, executed by him in many of his buildings. The aperture is a double square. The breadth of the architrave is one sixth of the breadth of the aperture; and the frieze and cornice together are double the height of the architrave. The breadth of the consoles is two thirds of the breadth of the architrave.

Fig. 4. Is a design of Ludovico Da Cigoli; and ex- ecuted in the ground-floor of the Ramanchini palace at Florence.

Fig. 5. Is a design of Inigo Jones, executed at the Banqueting-house. The aperture may be a double square; the architrave may be one fifth of its breadth; the whole entablature one quarter of its height; and the breadth of the consoles two thirds of the breadth of the architrave.

Fig. 6. Is a design of M. Angelo Buonaroti, execu- ted at the Farnese.

OF NICHES AND STATUES.

It hath been customary, in all ages, to enrich differ- ent parts of buildings with representations of the human body. Thus the ancients adorned their temples, baths, theatres, &c., with statues of their deities, heroes, and legislators. The moderns still preserve the same custom, placing in their churches, palaces, &c., statues of illus- trious persons, and even groups composed of various fig- ures, representing occurrences collected from history, fables, &c. Sometimes these statues or groups are de- tached, raised on pedestals, and placed contiguous to the walls of a building, or in the middle of a room, court, or public square. But they are most frequently placed in cavities made in the walls, called niches. Of these there are two sorts; the one formed like an arch in its elevation, and semicircular or semielliptical in its plan; the other is a parallelogram both in its plan and eleva- tion.

The proportion of both these niches depends on the character of the statues, or the general form of the groups placed in them. The lowest are at least a double square in height; and the highest never exceed 2½ of their breadth.

With regard to the manner of decorating them, when they are alone in a composition, they are generally in- closed in a panel, formed and proportioned like the a- perature of a window, and adorned in the same manner. In this case, the niche is carried quite down to the bot- tom; but on the sides and at the top, a small space is left between the niche and the architrave of the panel. And when niches are intermixed with windows, they may be adorned in the same manner with the windows, provided the ornaments be of the same figure and dimen- sions with those of the windows.

The size of the statues depends on the dimensions of the niches. They should neither be so large as to have the appearance of being rammed into the niches, as in Santa Maria Maggiore at Rome; nor so narrow as to seem lost in them, as in the Pantheon. The distance between the outline of the statue and side of the niche should never be less than one third of a head, nor more than one half, whether the niche be square or arched; and when it is square, the distance from the top of the head to the ceiling of the niche should not be greater than the distance on the sides. Statues are generally raised on a plinth, the height of which may be from one third to one half of a head; and sometimes, where the niches are large, the statues may be raised on small pedestals.

The character of the statue should always correspond with the character of the architecture with which it is surrounded. Thus, if the order be Doric, Hercules, Jupiter, Mars, Esculapius, and all male statues repre- senting beings of a robust and grave nature, may be in- troduced; if Ionic, then Apollo, Bacchus, &c.; and if Corinthian, Venus, Flora, and others of a delicate na- ture, should be employed.

OF CHIMNEY-PIECES.

Among the ancients, there are very few examples of chimney-pieces to be met with. Neither the Italians nor French have excelled in compositions of this kind. Britain, by being possessed of many able sculptors at different different times, has surpassed all other nations, both in taste of design, and workmanship.

The size of the chimney must be regulated by the dimensions of the room where it is placed. In the smallest apartments, the breadth of the aperture should never be less than three feet, to three feet six inches. In rooms from 20 to 24 feet square, or of equal superficial dimensions, it may be from 4 to $4\frac{1}{2}$ feet broad; in those of 24 to 27, from $4\frac{1}{2}$ to 5; and, in such as exceed these dimensions, the aperture may even be extended to $5\frac{1}{2}$ or 6 feet.

The chimney should always be situate so as to be immediately seen by those who enter the room. The middle of the partition wall is the most proper place in halls, salons, and other rooms of passage; but in drawing-rooms, dressing-rooms, and the like, the middle of the back wall is the best situation. In bed-rooms, the chimney is always in the middle of one of the partition-walls; and in closets, and other very small places, to save room, it is put in a corner. Where-ever two chimneys are used in the same room, they should be placed either directly facing each other, if in different walls, or at equal distances from the centre of the wall in which they both are.

The proportion of the apertures of chimney-pieces of a moderate size is generally a perfect square; in small ones, it is a trifle higher; and in large ones, a trifle lower. Their ornaments consist in architraves, frizes, cornices, columns, pilasters, terminals, caryatides, consoles, and all kinds of ornaments of sculpture, representing animals and vegetables, &c., likewise vases, chalices, trophies of arms, &c. In designing them, regard must be had to the nature of the place where they are to be employed. Such as are intended for halls, salons, guard-rooms, galleries, and other large places, must be composed of large parts, few in number, of distinct and simple forms, and having a bold relief; but chimney-pieces for drawing-rooms, dressing-rooms, &c., may be of a more delicate and complicated nature.

Chimney-pieces are composed of wood, stone, or marble; the last of which ought to be preferred, as figures or profiles are best represented in a pure white.

Plate XXXIII. Fig. 1, 2, 3, and 4, are different designs for chimney-pieces by Palladio and Inigo Jones. Their proportion may be gathered from the designs, which are accurately executed.

OF THE PROPORTIONS OF ROOMS.

The proportions of rooms depend in a great measure on their use, and actual dimensions: But, with regard to beauty, all figures, from a square to an equilateral, may be employed for the plan.

The height of rooms depends on their figure. Flat ceiled ones may be lower than those that are coved. If their plan be a square, their height should not exceed five sixths of the side, nor be less than four fifths; and when it is oblong, their height may be equal to their breadth. But coved rooms, if square, must be as high as broad; and when oblong, they may have their height equal to their breadth, more one fifth, one quarter, or even one third of the difference between the length and breadth: And galleries should, at least be in height one and one third of their breadth, and at most one and a half, or one and three fifths.

The coldness of the British climate is a strong objection to high rooms; so that it is not uncommon to see the most magnificent apartments not above 15, 16, or at most 18 feet high; though the extent of the rooms would require a much more considerable elevation. But, where beauty is aimed at, this practice ought not to be imitated.

When rooms are adorned with an entire order, the entablature should never exceed one sixth of the whole height in flat-ceiled rooms, and one fifth of the upright part in coved ones; and when there are neither columns nor pilasters, but only an entablature, its height should not be above one seventh of these heights. If the rooms be finished with a simple cornice, it should never exceed one fourteenth, nor ever less than one fifteenth part of the above-mentioned height.

OF CEILINGS.

Ceilings are either flat, or coved, in different manners. The simplest of the flat kind are those adorned with large compartments, surrounded with one or several mouldings, either let into the ceiling, or projecting beyond its surface: And when the mouldings that form the compartments are enriched, and some of the compartments adorned with well-executed ornaments, such ceilings have a good effect, and are very proper for common dwelling-houses, and all low apartments. Their ornaments and mouldings do not require a bold relief; but, being near the eye, they must be finished with taste and neatness. For higher rooms, a flat ceiling which has the appearance of being composed of various joists framed into each other, and forming compartments of various geometrical figures, should be employed. The sides of the joists forming the compartments are generally adorned with mouldings, and represent either a simple architrave, or an architrave-cornice, according to the size of the compartments and the height of the room.

Coved ceilings are more expensive; but they are likewise more beautiful. They are used promiscuously in large and small rooms, and occupy from one fifth to one third of the height of the room. If the room be low in proportion to its breadth, the cove must likewise be low; and when it is high, the cove must be so likewise: By which means the excess of the height will be rendered less perceptible. But, where the architect is at liberty to proportion the height of the room to its superficial dimensions, the most eligible proportion for the cove is one fourth of the whole height. In parallelogram-figured rooms, the middle of the ceiling is generally formed into a large flat panel. This panel, with the border that surrounds it, may occupy from one half to three fifths of the breadth of the room. The figure of the cove is commonly either a quadrant of a circle or of an ellipse, taking its rise a little above the cornice, and finishing at the border round the great panel in the centre. The border projects somewhat beyond the coves on the outside. side; and, on the side towards the pannel, it is generally made of a sufficient depth to admit the ornaments of an architrave, or architrave and cornice.

In Britain, circular rooms are not much in use; but they are very beautiful. Their height must be the same with that of square rooms; their ceilings may be flat; but they are handsomer when coved, or of a concave form.

Arcs doubleaux, or soffits of arches, when narrow, are ornamented with guillochis, or frets; but, when broad, they may be adorned in a different manner.

When the profiles of the room are gilt, the ceilings ought likewise to be gilt. The usual method is to gild all the ornaments, and to leave the grounds white, pearl colour, light blue, or of any other tint proper to set off the gilding to advantage. Painted ceilings, so common in France and Italy, are but little used in Britain.

OF STAIRS AND STAIR-CASES.

There are many kinds of stair-cases; for some the steps are made straight; in others, winding; in others mixt of both. Of straight stairs, some fly directly forward; others are square; others triangular. Others are called French flights, or winding-flights, (which in general are called spiral or cockle-flights;) of which some are square; some circular, or round; and some elliptical, or oval; and these again are various; for some wind about a solid, others about an open newel. Stairs mixt of straight and winding steps are also of various kinds; some are called dog-legged; some there are that wind about a solid newel; and others that fly about a square open newel.

Great care ought to be taken in placing of the stair-case in any building; and therefore stair-cases ought to be described, and accounted for justly, when the plan of a building is made. For want of this, sometimes unpardonable errors have been committed: Such as having a little blind stair-case to a large house; or, on the other hand, to have a large spacious stair-case to a little one.

Palladio says, in placing stair-cases, the utmost care ought to be taken, it being difficult to find a place convenient for them, that will not at the same time prejudice the rest of the building. But commonly the stairs are placed in the angle, wing, or middle of the front.

To every stair-case are required three openings.

First, the door leading thereto,

Secondly, the window, or windows, that give light to it;

And, thirdly, the landing.

First, the door leading to a stair-case should be so placed, that most of the building may be seen before you come at the stairs, and in such a manner that it may be easy for any person to find out.

Secondly, for the windows; if there be but one, it must be placed in the middle of the stair-case, that thereby the whole may be enlightened.

Thirdly, the landing of stairs should be large and spacious, for the convenient entering into rooms: In a word, stair-cases should be spacious, light, and easy in ascent.

The height of large steps must never be less than six inches, nor more than seven inches and a half.

The breadth of steps should never be less than ten inches, nor more than eighteen inches; and the length of them nor less than three feet, nor more than twelve.

Plate XXXIV. Fig. 1. A stair-case of two flights.—A shews the manner of drawing the ramp, which is to rise equal to the height of the first step of the next flight, and as much as its knelling; as is shewn by the ramp intersecting the rail of the second flight.

Fig. 2. Shews the straight rail intersecting a circular cap.

Fig. 3. Section of two different hand-rails.

Fig. 4. Shews the manner of dove-tailing the rifer into the step.

Plate XXXV. Fig. 1. Represents a stair-case, with flights, and its landing rail.

Fig. 2. Shews the fold part of the step out of which the scroll is formed; where a represents the overfall of the step; b, The thickness of the bracket, with its mitring to the rifer; and, c, The string-board.

Fig. 4. Shews the scale for drawing the scroll of fig. 3.—To perform which, take the distance from 1 to the centre, in fig. 3, and set it from 1 to the centre in fig. 4.; divide that extent into three parts, then set four such parts on the upper side of the scale, and draw the line from 4 to 1; set one foot of your compasses at 4, and strike the circular line; let that be divided into 12 equal parts, and then draw lines from 4 through those divisions to the upright line.

The scale being thus made, draw the scroll of fig. 3, by it in the following manner.

Set one foot of your compasses in 1, and describe a stroke at c; take the same distance, and with one-foot in 2, cross the stroke at c; then from c, turn the part from 1 to 2, and proceed in the same manner; for if the distance were taken in the scale from 1 to the centre, it would strike the circle too flat; and if taken from 2, it would strike the circle too quick.

When this is well understood, there will be little difficulty in drawing the scroll below fig. 2.; which throws itself out farther in proportion than that in fig. 3.; for this will always be the case when the upper line of the scale, which consists of four divisions in fig. 4., is made but with three divisions or less; whence it appears, that the upper line of the scale may be drawn at what length you please, according as you would bring in or keep out the scroll.

Plate XXXVI. Shews the manner of squaring twist-rails.

Fig. 2. Exhibits the pitch-board, to shew what part of the step the twisted part of the rail contains; the three dotted lines drawn from the rail to the pitch-board represent the width of the rail, which is to be kept level. The dotted lines a and b shew how much half the width of the rail turns up from its first beginning to 3.

Fig. 3. Shews the same pitch-board, with the manner of the rail's turning up. If the sides of the twisted part of the rail be shaped by the rail-mould, so that they direct down to its ground-plan, that is, the upper side of of the rail being first struck by the mould; then apply the mould to the under side, as much back as the level of the pitch-board shews, by being struck on the side of the rail, and then fig. 3, being applied to the outside of the rail, from its first twisting part to 3, will show how much wood is to be taken off.

Fig. 5. Exhibits the square of the rail, with the raking-line of the pitch-board drawn through the middle on the upper side; then draw the depth of the side of the rail parallel to this, and the dotted lines from the diagonal of the rail; these lines shew what quantity of wood will be wanting on the upper and lower sides of the rail. Set your compasses at c, and draw the circular stroke from the raking part of the pitch-board to b; take the distance a b, and transfer it from a to b, in fig. 7. The several distances thus found may be set at any num- ber of places, ranging with the straight part of the rail; and it then forms the width of the mould for the twist- ing part of the rail.

Fig. 7. Shews the sweep of the rail. The rail can- not be fixed less than one fourth part from the nosing or front of the step.

The remaining part of the pitch-board may be divided into any number of parts, as here into four; from these divisions draw lines across the pitch-board to the raking- line; then take the distances from the ground-line of the pitch-board to the plan of the rail, and set them perpen- dicular from the raking-line of the pitch-board; and these divisions, when the rail is in its proper position, lie directly over the divisions on the ground-plan.

In this figure l, m, and n, rise as much above o as the dotted line in fig. 5, does above the width of the rail; and they sink as much below o as the other dotted line in fig. 5, falls below the width of the rail; the same thickness must be glued upon o, though the greatest part will come off in squaring. The reason of placing the letters l, m, and n, where they are, is, that they might not obstruct the small divisions of the rail-mould.

Fig. 4. Shews how to find the rail when it takes more than one step. The remaining part of the pitch- board is divided into four parts, as before in fig. 7, and it takes in two such parts of the next step. Draw lines from these divisions to the diagonal of the pitch-board, as in fig. 7; then take the distance a b, and set it from c to d, and so proceed with the other divisions.

Another way to find the outside of the rail-mould is, to draw all the divisions across the plan of the rail; then take the distance from the ground-line of the pitch-board to 4, transfer it from the diagonal of the pitch-board to 4 on the rail; and so proceed with the other distances. Now, when the rail is put in its proper situation, c will be perpendicular to b, and all the divisions, as 1, 2, 3, 4, &c., in the rail, will be perpendicular to 1, 2, 3, 4, &c., in the ground-plan.

Fig. 6. Shews the plan of a rail of five steps.

To find the rail.—Set five divisions, as from e to f, which is the height of the five steps; draw the diagonal b to the plan of the rail; then take the distance e f, and transfer it from g to h, and proceed in the same manner with the other seven distances.

To find the width of the rail-mould.—Draw the lines across the plan of the rail, as at k; set that distance from the diagonal to i; and so proceed with the rest, as was shewn in fig. 4.

Having formed the sides of the rail perpendicular to its ground-plan, and having squared the lower end of the rail, then take a thin lath, and bend it with the rail, as is represented by m fig. 1.

This is the readiest method of squaring a solid-rail; but if the rail be bent in the thicknesses, the nosing of the steps must be drawn upon a cylinder, or some other solid body of a sufficient width to contain the width of the rail or string-board.

r. Represents the depth of the rail, touching the nose of each step. Take a sufficient number of thicknesses of this width, to make the thickness of your rail; glue them all together upon your cylinder or templet, confine them till they are dry, and the rail taken off is ready squared. Proceed in the same manner with the archi- trave, marked a.

OF ROOFS.

Plate XXXVII. Fig. 1. Shews the form of a trussed roof, with three ring-poits, that may carry sev- enty feet, or upwards.

Fig. 2. Exhibits an M roof, capable of carrying as great an extent as the former. Indeed both these de- signs are capable of carrying almost any extent.

Fig. 3. Represents two different sorts of trusses.

Fig. 4. Shews the manner of piecing timber. Some- times the joint may be extended as far as a, with another bolt through it. To the right is shewn a different sort of joint.

Fig. 5. Shews the manner of trussing a girder. If the trusses are full long, with the pieces b and c you may make them as light as you please.

Fig. 6. Represents the manner of trussing partitions.

Military Architecture, the same with what is oth- erwise called fortification. See Fortification.

Naval Architecture, the art of building ships. See Ship-building.

Counterfeit Architecture, that which consists of projections, painted in black or white, or in colours after the manner of marble, which is also called scene-work, in the painting of columns, &c. for the decoration of theatres.

Architecture, in perspective, a sort of building, the members of which are of different modules, and di- minish proportionably to their distance, in order to make the work appear longer to the view than it really is. See Perspective.