Scanned text contains errors.
structed was called liypactliral (vtratOpos*). [tkm-plum.]
But it was on the exterior of public buildings, and especially of temples, that columns were displayed in the most beautiful combinations, either surrounding the building entirely, or arranged in porticoes on one or more of its fronts. (For the various arrangements of columns see templum.) Their original and proper use was, of course, to support the roof of the building ; and, amidst all the elaborations of architectural design, this object was still kept in view. The natural arrangement in such a case is obvious. A continuous beam (or series of beams) would be laid on the tops of a row of columns. On this beam would rest the ends of the cross-beams ; which would be tied together by another continuous piece, parallel to the first; and above this, if the columns were at one end of the building, would rise the pitch of the roof. Now in the actual parts of an architectural order, we see the exact counterpart of these arrangements. On the summit of the row of columns rests the architrave, i. e. chief beam (sirivrvXiov, epistylium: above this is the frieze (^wotpopos, £co<£opojr, zophorus), in. which, the most ancient order, namely the Doric, shows, in its triglyphs, what were originally the ends of the cross-beams: in the other orders these ends are generally concealed, and the frieze forms a flat surface, which is frequently ornamented by figures in relief, whence its Greek name. Above the frieze projects the cornice (icopwvis, coronis, or corona), forming a handsome finish to. the entablature (for so these three members taken together are called), and also, on the sides of the building, serving to unite the ends of the rafters of the roof. The triangular gable-end of the roof, above the entablature, is called the pediment. [fastigium.] The detailed description of the various portions of the column and entablature, in each of the orders, will be best understood by reference to the following wood-cuts, which are taken from Mauch's Grie-cliiscJten und Romiscken BaK-Ordnungen.
I. The Doric Order is characterized by the absence of a base, the thickness and rapid diminution of the shaft, and the simplicity of the capital, which consists of a deep abacus, supported by a very flat oval moulding, called echinus, beneath which are from three to five steps or channels (IjUayres, anmdi). Instead of the hypoirachelium (a sort of neck which unites the shaft to the capital in the other orders) there is merely a small portion of the shaft cut off by one or more narrow channels. In the entablature, the architrave is in one surface, and quite plain: the frieze is ornamented by trigli/pks (so called from the three flat bands into which they are divided by the intervening channels), one of which is found over each column, and one over each intercolumniation, except that the triglyph over a corner column is placed, not over the centre of the column, but at the extremity of the architrave, — a decisive proof, as Vitruvius remarks, that the triglyphs do not represent windows. The metopes between the triglyphs were ornamented with sculptures in high relief. The cornice is flat, and projects far, and on its under side are cut several sets of drops, called mutules (mutuli), one over each triglyph and each metope, the surfaces of which follow the slope of the roof, and which are said by Vitruvius to repre -sent the ends of the rafters of the roof. In the
most ancient examples of the order the columns are very short in proportion to their greatest thickness. In the temple at Corinth, which is supposed to be the oldest of all, the height of the columns is only 7f modules (i.e. semi-diameters), and in the great temple at Paestum only 8 modules ; but greater lightness was afterwards given to the order, so that, in the Parthenon, which is the best example, the height of the columns is 12 modules. The following profile is from the temple of Apollo Epi-curius at Phigaleia, built by the same architect as the Parthenon. For a comparison of tbe other chief examples, see the work of Mauch.
The Roman architects made considerable variations in the order, the details of which are shown in the engraving on the following page, from an example at Albano near.Rome. In the later examples of the Roman Boric, a base is given to the column. II. The Ionic Order is as much distinguished by simple gracefulness as the Doric by majestic strength. The column is much more slender than the Doric, having, in the earliest known example, namely, the temple of Artemis at Ephesus, a height of 16 modules, which was afterwards increased to 18. The shaft rests upon a base, which was either the elaborate Ionic or the Attic [SpiRA; atticurges]. The capital either springs directly from the shaft, or there is a hi/potrachelium, ] separated from the shaft by an astragal moulding