« AnteriorContinuar »
leffening that profit which is its chief ftrength; if these ought to be its views, we should do well to contider whether the prefent mode is adapted to anfwer any one of them.
One point in the old fyftem feems now to be given up. The dollars if fued at this time are made current for more than their intrinfic worth. So far this is well, as it will prevent their being carried to the melting pot; but, as they want that fecurity from forgery, which exquifite workmanship alone can give, this very step will caufe them to be immediately counterfeited. Such ever was, and fuch ever will be, the confequence of half-meafures. Yours, &c. ROGERS RUDING,
GRECIAN ARCHITECTURE, No. XIX.
THE lois of the explanatory Defigne drawn by Vitruvius mult ever be regretted by his commentators; and, according to Perrault, the text alfo might be deemed as effectually lott as the drawings; for he fays, of this verbal defcription of the Ionic capital, the text is obfcure, of doubtful authenticity, replete with the blunders of inat tentive copiefis, &c.: but is it not furprifing that, impreffed with fuch a conviction, he fhould have attempted to fend forth an Ionic capital according to Vitruvius! Jocundus acknowledges that on collating a number of MSS. he found different readings; but this is what has happened to all antient works tranfmitted to pofterity by manual tranfcribers but though Jocundus has not noted the particular corrections made in his edition; yet from other copies it it found that the different readings confift in corrections of grammatical, and not technical, inaccuracies; for which Vitruvius himself modelily afks the indulgence of his readers; fome of thefe are ftill uncorrected, as donicum, calefaciuntur, e infiead of æ, &c. But where technical documents are affected, Jocundus was indefatigable in collating MSS, and fearching after antique remains to affitt in refioring the genuine reading; and in the few occurrences wherein he could obtain no light, which in the courfe of fuch a multifarious work must fometimes be the cafe, he obtruded not his own conjectures, but left things, he tells us, as he found them. Yet after all this induftry, if we are to be led by Perrault, we muft fearce admit, in this Jonic capital's de
feription, a fingle line for authentic : but the reader will prefently fee the futility of his corrections and conjectures.
Vitruvius, after eltablishing, by a divifion of the diameter of the column, the extent and height of the capitał, fays, "Recedendum autem eft ab extremo abaco in interiorem partem frontibus volutarum parte duodevigefima et ejus dimidia." i. e. There muft be funk inwards at the fronts of the vo Intes an eighteenth part and an half from the extremity of the abacus." Now this meafure is exactly five minutes. For as Vitruvius orders the diameter to be divided into 18, in order to give 19 fuch parts to the extent of the abacus, fo he orders one eighteenth and the recefs 5 minutes. But becaufe this projecture of 5 minutes accorded not with Perrault's prepoffeffion in favour of the lefs projecture in fome remains of the Roman antique, he proclaimed a corruption of the text, and that copiests blundered on the word duodevigefima inficad of duodecima; and as the integer in the text, viz. the diameter of the column, evidently foiled him, and rendered his fuppofition abfurd; he attempted the fupport of his correction, duodecimą, by another conjecture fill more ridiculous, that Vitruvius had wrote duodecima, and forgot to mention the integer which he divided into twelve, and tells us he ought to have wrote duodecima parte et ejus dimidia craffitudinis tolius capituli !!! This thrice admirable correction of Perrault's is a confirmation of the charge repeatedly exhibited in thefe Letters against him, that he was morę intent on recommending his own coujectures than the fenfe of Vitruvius.
In fine, the beauty refulting from the exa& obfervance of the difpofition of the parts and judicious fymmetries clearly taught by the text as publifhed by Jocundus, will at once enfure its univerfal preference to every other device of this lonic capital, and will be a ftanding proof againti Perrault and other innovators, of the authenticity of the text, whence are taken its fymmetries, as follow:
The volute, as in No. XVII and XVIII. Fillet of abacus 13 minute high, 312 projecture from central line: the cyma reverfa 34 high, projecture under the fillet 303, over the rim of volute 274; face of rim under the abaens, in middle of capital, projecture 263; ground of channel 25 projecture;
the cymatium (called ovolo) 6 high, projecture 35; aftragal 3 high, projecture 28; fillet under the aftragal 12 high, projecture 26; contraétion of thaft under the fillet and sweep25projec. ture. The reformed capital of Michael Angelo is in general ufe; but when the antient capital is required, the rim of volute on the flank is 44 thick, and a fall groove cut in the middle, and a fillet a little funk behind out of the 44, at which the points of the leaves terminate: the fivell of the belt projects equal to the ovolo in front; its defcent from fothit of abacus 18, turning up inwards, fo as to clear the aftragal only, which must be feen all round the top of the fhaft: the breadth of the belt fhould be about 8 minutes, and it fhould approach the foffit of the abacus in a hollow fweep, funk equal to the ground of the rini in front; fillets on each fide the belt in 14 minutes defcent, from foffit of abacus, from thefe fillets. fpring leaves, whereof the contour firit fivells into a round, then finks into a hollow, and gracefully rifes to terminate on the edge of the fillets behind the volutes. The water leaf, as it is called by carvers, well fuits this fituaYours, &c.
PHILO-TECHNON. P.S. Permit P——, Mr. Urban, to avail himself of this opportunity to notice a Poftfcript of your Correfpondent, Obfervator, in tol. LXXIII, p. 912,
tranflation of this paffage, well perceiv ing it expofes the whimsical invention of his dodecaftyle Ephefian Diana. And why Mr. Newton's terin footings for by it he muft mean the fame as is here brought forward appears not, Pt's fallies of the platform over the upper rifer; and thefe fallies of fieps are vulgarly called nofings.-By this opportunity, P-t- begs leave to recommend to your Correfpondent Invefligator, who fill amutes himself late the 23 ch. xxxvi book of Pliny's with the dodecaftyle invention, to colNatural History with the 14 ch. ibid. In the 23 ch. he tells us, the height of the columns in the Ephefian Diana was a third part of the breadth of the temple, and this breadth he gives, in the 14 ch. at 220 feet, the height of the column; then, including the baje and capital, fays Pliny, is a third of the breadth=73 feet 4 inches: and by his cautionfly mentioning the addition of the bafe and, capital in this place, is proof enough that when in the 14th ch. he fays, the columns were 60 feet high,' he meant only the fhaft without bale and capital. Thus are the two pailages' of Pliny reconciled. But let Investigator try his fkill in reconciling the dodecaftyle to fuch an height of column! PHILO-TECHNON.
Nov. 8, 1803.
1220, attempted to define the diftinction, which exifts between Reafon and Inflinct; and to prove, confequently, from the very nature of each, that Infind dies, but that Reafon will live for ever.
wherein he has indulged his refentimentHAVE already, in vol. LXXII, p. rather than thewn his, liberality, by calling Pt's reafoning, in the long continued controverfy on the Ephefian Diana, fophiftical. However, it is gdd enough that this Gentleman's reafoning, which, no doubt, he believes to This fubject is, I think, in be very found and good, fhould have fone meature connected with one proinduced him to call a redundancy an pofed in your Magazine for September Qmillion; and fill more odd that his, lat, in the review of Mr. Young's found reafon fhould have been culight- publication, entitled "The Evidence ened by a fophift, fo as to fee the neof Relation between our prefent Exiltcellity of a correction! See Pence and future State."-As no trivial letter, Gent. Mag. vol. LXXII, part 2, oblervations of mine can in the least page 1179,-Obfervator alfo, in the affect any thing that may hereafter be cited poffeript, has obliged us with Mr. faid on the fame fubject; the following Newton's tranflation of the term crepireflections on "Continued Confciouldines of Vitruvius, i. c. footings, which nefs" may perhaps find admiffion into he fays is, no doubt, the true meaning your pages, as the mere amusement of of the author; but though, no doubt, an idle kour. he has feen Mr. Newton's tranflation of the words in the 1 ch. and i book of Vitruvius, Dipteros autem octalylos ...mi eft ædes Quirini dorica, et Ephefice Diana Ionica, he has not difobliged himself to far as to infert his
If, then, instinct ceases to exist at the very inftant that the fpark of animat life is extinguithed; it is, because they are fo entirely dependent on, and blended with, each other, that when the body perifhes, no confciouffels can
poffibly remain. And, on the contrary, if reafon lives, it is, and muti be, becaufe, as before ftated, it is confcious of an existence, difiinct from its connexion with matter; which confciouf nefs, therefore, mult of course remain, after its union with matter fhall be diffolved. For, if the foul is immortal, it cannot by any partial change of external circumftances lofe the aflurance of its identity. The body perishes, and inftinct is no more! But why does instinct alfo perish? Because it is evident, on a firict examination of its qualities, that it cannot retain a confcioufnefs of existence, when feparated from matter. And, on the very fame account, if the foul, at the hour of diffolution, loft its powers of reflection, and could no longer retain a recollection of the past, it must alfo perish. It is eafy enough, indeed, to affert, without proof; but, if I mittake not, the above polition may be proved. When the component parts of any created being are diffolved, that being, of necellity, ceafes to exift. No one will affert that this does not hold good with refpect to the human body; conviction every way furrounds us. But if it is true with refpect to the body, it must alfo be true with reference to the foul. We have then only to inquire, what are the component parts, or rather attributes, of the fpirit, or foul of man? They are thefe which follow: reason, reflection, recollection, anticipation, and a knowledge of its own exiflence! At the very intiant, therefore, that the foul thall be divefted of thefe inherent powers, it will, from that very inftant, be annihilated. But it will, perhaps, be objected, that if the body is not annihilated at its diffolution, but merely decompofed for a feafon, the fame may likewife be alerted of the foul. This affumption, however, cannot be admitted as true. Why does the brute die, to live no more? Because its infines cease to be, in the moment when the corporeal organs, by which they were actuated, are diffolved. And, if the rational foul, the inflincts, and the material portion of man, were at once to be divelled of thofe qualities which are effential to their being, he alfo would perifh for ever; bat the foul remains immutably the fame, and alike confcious of its own exiftence, when the body and its inftincts are mingled with the duft. To renew a foul and body that had been diffolved, would be,
not a refurrection, but an act of creation: bút to collect the fcattered parti cles of a fubftance which had fimply been diffevered, and to re-unite them in a glorified ftate, to a foul, which has not for a single instant loft its consciousnefs, or, in other words, ceafed to exiti, is not to make a new creature; but to exalt that which is, to a full higher de gree of excellence, and to clothe it with the perfection of beauty. The mode may vary, but the identity is the fame. One difficulty here occurs; how can this confcioufnels of exiftence be fuppofed inherent in the fouls of infants, or of idiots; who never were aware even of their own being? What then becomes of their reafon, their reflection, their recollection, and their knowledge? This difficulty, however, may, I think, be determined as follows: When the foul of man is matured by a long refidence in the body, its principal powers are at length fo far developed, and the rudiments of that knowledge, which is to exift eternally, are fo firmly fixed, that they can by no cafualty be effaced; whereas in infants and idiots the cafe is reverfed. The foul with them has not opened into bloom; but is, as yet, in the very bud and germ of its creation. It is not imperfect in itfelf, but the organs by which it is to act are incapable of conveying thofe fenfations which are requifite to expand its inherent powers of action; or the machine is incomplete, and the fmothered fpark of reafon cannot be lighted into flame. When death, therefore, fhall diffolve this myftic union, the foul which has been enabled to exert its inherent powers (even though they may for a feafon have been deranged by mental darkness) fhall fill retain the confcionfnefs that they have been exerted. "We shall be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye."The fen fation will probably be fuch as often takes place, when, although the bodily functions are fufpended, the foul remains collected in itself; unable, indeed, to actuate the body, but fill fenfible of every abject which furrounds it. Such, it is reasonable to imagine, will be our fate at the moment of death. The foul will be paffire, but full retain its confcioufnefs, excepting where that confcionthefs mav, for an infiant, in the mere tranfit from death to life, be overpowered by fuffering. But then the cloud will inftantly pass away, and the dream of death be clearly, and dif