THE

CRITICAL REVIEW.

For the Month of September, 1768.

ARTICLE I.

The Grecian Orders of Architecture Delineated and Explained from the Antiquities of Athens. Alfo the Parallels of the Orders of Palladio, Scamozzi, and Vignola. To which are added, Remarks concerning Public and Private Edifices, with Defigns. Folio. Pr. l. 55. Dixwell. Concluded.

a

this work, proceeded not without pleasure through the Introduction, in which not only a fummary history of Architecture is given, but many abuses in the practice of that art are cenfured, and the Vitruvian terms Proportion, Eurythmy, and Symmetry, are defined and distinguished.

Our author proceeds in the fecond chapter to treat of the orders. The word Order, he obferves, is ufed, by architects, to fignify a regular affemblage and arrangement of the several -proportions and ornaments of an entire column, and its entire entablature: three of them are of Grecian invention, and feem as if they were intended to reprefent three manners of building, the ftrong, the mean, and the delicate. This he illuftrates by plate I. in which we obferve, that, deviating from the common practice, he has given the tallest entablature to the Doric. In this we nevertheless think him juftifiable, because it appears rational, that the most maffive column fhould fupport the weightieft entablature. In the fame plate is fhewn two different manners of constructing the modulary fcale, which neceffary operation is diftin&tly explained in this chapter. Tables of the altitudes and projectures of the principal members are given; and the Vitruvian Latin names of the various mouldings used VOL. XXVI. Sept. 1758. M

by

by architects, are interpreted by their equivalent terms in Ita lian and English: the profiles of thefe mouldings are given in plate II. and they are enriched with ornaments taken from fome of the beft examples of antiquity.

The third chapter begins with a comparison of four different profiles of entablatures taken from Daviler, the first of which is copied after the temple of Fortuna Virilis at Rome; the fecond, after the baths of Dioclefian; the third, from Palladio and the fourth from Serlio, in order to fhew the manner of comparing profiles. This appears to be judiciously introduced, fince, by accuftoming the student to reafon on this subject, he may be enabled to make a good choice, from those various examples which will offer themselves to his confideration. To this follows the doctrine of intercolumniations; the diminution of the fhafts of columns; a method of forming the fcroll modillion; with fome specimens of balusters and vases. Four different cornices are defcribed; and the manner of determining the pitch of a pediment, according to the practice of the ancient Grecians. Our author's rule for fixing the size of statues to be placed on the acroteria of buildings, is ingenious. The fuperior diameter of the fhaft of the column, says he, having prescribed the breadth of the acroterium over it, will determine also the size of a ftatue in an erect posture, because the ftatue requires neither more nor lefs space to ftand upon than a circle, whereof the length of its foot is nearly half of the faid diameter, as is fhewn by the traces of the feet marked out in the plot; the acroterium therefore cannot admit of a statue taller than three times that diameter. This limitation for ftatues will always adjust the true proportions they should have with their respective columns.' The plates III. and IV. explain whatever is advanced in this chapter.

:

The fourth chapter treats of the Doric order. In this we find Mr Riou a ftri&t follower of the ancients. He is, in oppofition to common practice, an advocate for the angular triglyph; and he condemns the modern addition of a base to its column. We will not take upon us to decide in this difpute. We think his arguments fpecious, but we cannot allow them to be conclufive, especially in what relates to the column without a bafe for though it may be faid, that it is one of the characteristics of the Doric order to have no bafe; and that we may with equal propriety omit the triglyphs and metopes in the freeze of this order, or give it a Corinthian capital; nay, though the antiquities of Athens, Rome, and Poftum, are the authorities our author follows, and Monfieur de Chambray concurs with him in the fame opinion; which has a farther fanction from the practice of our immortal Inigo Jones, who has left an example of it in the garden of a house in Dean's 7 Yard,

3

Yard, Westminster; yet there feems to be no argument deducible from the nature of things, which can convince us, that this one fpecies of column fhould be for ever condemned to make its appearance without a base: had the inventors originally given it one, the moderns would hardly ever have thought of improving on them by laying it aside. The height he affigns to this column is nearly the fame with that given to it by Vitruvius and Pliny, both of whom make it lower than the Tufcan; and their doctrine is confirmed by a great number of excellent ancient authorities. We own ourselves pleased with the form and diftribution of the mutules under the corona in plate V. which must be allowed to appear more beautiful than those given by Monfieur de Chambray from the Doric antiquity near Albano, or thofe at the theatre of Marcellus in Rome. As to the hypotrachelium or collarino, it may be faid, that it was probably derived to this order from the Tuscan, and may therefore be thought an addition of the Romans, when the Doric order was tranfplanted from Greece into their imperial city.

Our author begins his fifth chapter with remarks on pedeftals, and an explanation of a paffage in Vitruvius; one of those which ftill continue to puzzle his tranflators and commentators: It is this; Stylobatam ita oportet exæquari uti habeat per medium adje&tionem per scamillos impares, fi enim ad libellam dirigetur alveolatus oculo videbitur." Lib. III. cap. 3. 'The word Scamillus, fays Mr Riou, fignifies properly a little feat, or a footftool. What can resemble more to either of these, than that part of the continued pedestal that breaks forward under every column? and as the number of columns in the fides of the periptere was unequal, fo it was neceffary to hint that thefe fools (Seamilli) upon which the columns were to be raised, must be in odd numbers (impares) likewife. And if the projectures of all these familli were fet off in a right line (ad libellam), it made the whole fide of the ftylobates appear (alveolatus) channelled out or indented by regular intervals.?

This interpretation differs from that of Bernardino Baldo, but confirms the fuppofition of Philander and Barbaro, adopted by Perault, and exemplified in the poicile at Athens. See Stuart's Antiquities of Athens. Count Galliani, the laft editor of Vitruvius, hefitates to accept this fenfe, only because he has not feen any ancient example to juftify it. The remainder of this chapter contains the doctrine of the Ionic order, where we find a new method of forming the volute of that elegant capital, a scheme of which is given at plate IX, Three different kinds of bafes, likewife, are there propofed; one of which is taken from the little temple of Athens standing on the southern

M 2

bank

bank of the Iliffus; and, except the dentelled entablature, all the rest of this example is from the fame original, the entire plan and elevation of which is at plate X. We must observe, that the cornice of this temple is not the only one at Athens in which dentells are omitted; they are wanting in that of Minerva Polias, if Monfieur Le Roy may be credited; and hence we may fairly infer, that the ancients practifed a greater latitude in the conftruction of an order, than their followers among the moderns have ventured to allow themselves.

Chapter the fixth treats of the Corinthian order. This, our author fays, exhibits the highest degree of delicacy, beauty, and richness, to which any architectural design can arrive. It is very remarkable, he obferves, that the entablature which Palladio and other moderns have given to their Roman or compofite colunin, is no other than the true Corinthian entablature; as fuch it was found with its capital in that beautiful and ornamented fragment, called the Frontispiece of Nero, fuppofed to have made a part of the immenfe palace built by that emperor, and which he named his golden house, so called from the incredible richness bestowed upon it. Suetonius describes it as having several parts within fide overlaid with gold, and every where adorned with the dazzling glitter of precious stones and mother of pearl. Its extent was from the Palatine to the Efquiline mount: it contained porticos fupported by feveral rows of columns, a full mile in length: there was also a lake like a fea, furrounded with buildings, like fo many cities. From all this, we may infer, that a relique of this pediment, must be received as one of the most authentic models, in all the members of its entablature; and this is further confirmed by the Corinthian entablature of the poikile or ftoa, in the Antiquities of Athens, having exactly the fame members; but first of the pedestal and base.'

The pedeftal A, plate XII. is taken from the ftoa at Athens; and the base C, is the attic base, given to this order in the fame Athenian antiquity. What is particularly to be noticed, we are told, is, that the plinth of this base projects beyond the die of the pedestal, and this does not affect the solid bearing of the column, because the fhaft is ftill narrower than the breadth of the die of the pedestal, by the parts allowed to the fweep of the apophyges. This particular feems not to have been confined to the ftoa at Athens; the bases of the columns placed round the circular temple at Tivoli, project in like manner beyond the basement, and fo doth the base of those pilafters which adorn the attic within the Pantheon at Rome.

Vitruvius has cenfured as vicious the placing modillions and dentells in the fame cornice, and no Athenian example of this practice

2

practice has been published either by Mr. Stuart or Monfieur Le Roy. Mr Riou, notwithstanding his deference to thofe ancient authorities, has indulged his reader with an entablature, in the cornice of which thefe ornaments (fo incompatible according to Vitruvius) are both of them admitted. It is marked C, in plate XIII. We have already observed, that the example of the Ionic portico is taken from the little temple on the Iliflus; we should likewife have faid, that the Doric portico, plate VI. is the plan and elevation of a building ufually called the temple of Auguftus at Athens. The example which our author has given of a Corinthian building is also taken from an Athenian antiquity which Mr Stuart imagines to be the remains of the stoa, or poicile, as it is fometimes called. The measure of this building is given in the Antiquities of Athens, publifhed by Mr Stuart. It is there faid to have eighteen columns in front, and to extend 252 English feet. Monfieur Le Roy has alfo given this building in his Ruines des plus beaux Monumens de la Grece. He adorns the front with 46 columns, and extends it to 628 feet. As the accuracy of Meff. Stuart and Revett were hardly called in queftion, we were pleased to find the opinion the world entertains of their exactnefs confirmed, notwithstanding the extraordinary difference of Monfieur Le Roy's defcription, by the teftimony of a gentleman who has been on the fpot, and has himself, probably, measured this ruin.

The triumphal arch at Orange is greatly enriched with fculptures, which contribute much to its beautiful appearance. These our author has omitted. It is to be regretted, that no artist has published an accurate defcription of it, with all its ornaments, in the manner that the arches of Rome and Benevento have made their appearance. The general idea of it, given in the work before us, will convince every judge of architecture, that its proportions are excellent, and its compofition majestic.

The following chapter treats of doors and windows, with Doric, Fonic, and Corinthian dreffings, and of what are ufually called Venetian windows; examples of all which are given in plate XIV. In this we muft declare ourselves not content with the window F, where the femicircular arch breaks into the fegmental pediment; and we wifh the freezes in B, C, and D, had been defigned with greater delicacy. Some of the plates, efpecially III, XII, XIII, are not executed with due precifion. The author has doubtless thought them fufficient to explain his meaning, and obferves, that if they had been higher finished, it would have confiderably advanced the price, without an adequate advantage to the intelligent reader.

Chapter