Online Encyclopedia
Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
ORDER
Online EncyclopediaEncyclopedia Home :: ORC-PAI
del.icio.us it!
|
ORDER , in classic See also:architecture the See also:term employed (See also:Lat. genus, Ital. ordine, Sp. order, Ger. Ordnung) to distinguish the varieties of See also:column and See also:entablature which were employed by the Greeks and See also:Romans in their temples and public buildings. The first See also:attempt to classify the architectural orders was made by See also:Vitruvius, who, to those found in See also:Greek buildings, viz. the Doric, Ionic and Corinthian, added a See also:fourth, the Tuscan. On the revival of classic See also:art in See also:Italy, the revivalists translated Vitruvius's See also:work De Architectura, and added a fifth example, the Composite, so that nominally there are five orders. The Tuscan, however, is only an undeveloped and crude modification of the Doric order, and the Composite is the same as the Corinthian with the exception of the See also:capital, in which the volutes of the Ionic order were placed above the See also:acanthus leaves of the Corinthian.
An order in architecture consists of several parts, constructive in their origin, but, as employed afterwards, partly constructive and partly decorative; its See also:principal features are the column, consisting of See also:base (except in the Greek Doric order), See also:shaft and capital, and the entablature, subdivided into the See also:architrave (the supporting member), the See also:frieze (the decorative member) and the See also:cornice (the crowning and protecting member). Two only of the orders were independently evolved, viz. the Doric in See also:Greece and Magna Grecia, and the Ionic in See also:Ionia. For the Corinthian order, the...Greeks borrowed with slight See also:variations the entablature for their Ionic order, and the Romans employed this modified entablature for their Composite order. Owing to a certain re-semblance in See also:form, it was at one See also:time thought that the Greeks owed the origin of the Doric order to See also:Egypt, but the See also:Egyptian column has no See also:echinus under its See also:abacus, which in the earliest Doric examples is an extremely important See also:element in its See also:design, owing to its See also:great See also:size and See also:projection; moreover, the Doric column ceased to be employed in Egypt after the XIXth See also:Dynasty, some seven or eight centuries before the first Greek See also:colony was established there. Dr See also:Arthur See also:Evans's discoveries in the See also:palace of See also:Cnossus in See also:Crete have shown that the earliest type of the Doric column (c. 1500 B.c.) is that painted in a See also:fresco which represents the facades of three temples or shrines, the truth of this See also:representation being See also:borne out by actual remains in the palace; the columns were in See also:timber, tapered from the See also:top downwards, and were crowned by a projecting abacus supported by a large See also:torus moulding, probably moulded in See also:stucco. The next examples of the order are those in See also: 1200 B.C.), the greater portions of which are now set up in the See also:British Museum; and here both capital and shaft are richly decorated with the See also:chevron See also:pattern, probably derived from the See also:metal plates which in Homeric times sheathed the See also:wood columns. The columns of the Mycenae tombs are semi-detached only, and of very slender proportions, averaging to to 11 diameters in height; as isolated columns, therefore, they would have been incapable of carrying any See also:weight, so that in the next examples known, those of the See also:temple at See also:Corinth, where the columns had to carry an entablature in stone supporting a stone See also:ceiling over the See also:peristyle, the relation of See also:diameter to height is nearly one to four, so diffident were the Greek architects as to the bearing See also:power of the stone. In the temple of See also:Apollo at See also:Syracuse, also a very archaic example, the projection of the capital was so great that the abaci nearly touched one another, and the columns are less than one diameter apart. The subsequent development which took See also:place was in the lightening of the column and the introduction of many refinements, so that in the most perfected example known, the See also:Parthenon, the columns are 14 diameters apart and nearly 51 diameters high. In a somewhat later example, the temple of the Nemaean See also:Zeus (See also:Argos) the columns are 62 diameters high. A similar lightening of the structure took place in the entablature, which in the earliest temple in See also:Sicily is about See also:half the height of the columns, in the Parthenon less than a third, and in the Temple of the Nemaean Zeus a little over a fourth. The origin of the Ionic order is not so clear, and it cannot be traced beyond the remains of the archaic temple of See also:Diana at See also:Ephesus (c. 56o B.c.), now in the British Museum, in which the capitals and the See also:lower See also:drum of the shaft enriched with sculpturein their design and See also:execution suggest many centuries of development. Here again attempts have been made to trace the source to Egypt, but the See also:volute capital of the archaic temple of Diana at Ephesus and the decorative See also:lotus bud of Egypt are entirely different in their form and See also:object. The latter is purely decorative and See also:vertical in its tendency, the former is a feature intended to carry a superincumbent weight, and is extended horizontally so as to perform the See also:function of a See also:bracket-capital, viz. to lessen the bearing of the architrave or See also:beam which it carries. A similar constructive expedient is found in See also:Persian work at See also:Persepolis, which, however, See also:dates about See also:forty years later than the Ephesian work. The volutes of the capitals of the Lycian tombs are none of them older than the 4th See also:century, being copies of Greek stone examples. As with the Doric order, the columns became more slender than at first, those of the archaic temple being probably between 6 and 7 diameters high, of the temple on the Ilissus (c. 450 B.C.) 83i and of the temple of See also:Athena Polias at See also:Priene (c. 345 B.C.) over to diameters high. The employment of the two orders in See also:Athens simultaneously, and sometimes in the same See also:building, led to a reciprocal See also:influence one on the other; in the Doric order to an increased refinement in the See also:contour of its See also:mouldings, in the Ionic order to greater severity in treatment, more particularly in the bedmould, the members of which were reduced in number and simplified, the See also:dentil course (which in Ionia was a very important feature) being dispensed with in the temple on the Ilissus and in that of See also:Nike Apteros, and employed only in the caryatide See also:portico of the See also:Erechtheum. The capital of the Corinthian order, its only See also:original feature, may have been derived from the Egyptian See also:bell-capital, which was constantly employed there, even in See also:Roman times; its decoration was, however, purely Greek, and would seem to have been based on the application to the bell of foliage and See also:ornament derived from metallic forms. The inventor of the capital is said to have been See also:Callimachus of Corinth, who was a craftsman in metal and designed the See also:bronze See also:lamp and its See also:cover for the Erechtheum in Corinthian bronze, which may See also:account for the origin and See also:title of the capital. The earliest example of the Corinthian capital is that found at Bassae by See also:Cockerell, dating from about 430 B.C., and the more perfected type is that of the See also:Tholos of See also:Epidaurus (400 B.c.). Whilst the entablatures of the Doric and Ionic orders suggest their origin from timber construction, that of the Corinthian was simply borrowed from the Ionic order, and its subsequent development by the Romans affords the only instance of their improvement of a Greek order (so far as the See also:independent treatment of it was concerned) by the further enrichment of the bedmould of the cornice, where the introduction of the See also:modillion gave an increased support to the See also:corona and was a finer crowning feature. The Greek Doric order was not understood by the Romans, and was, with one or two exceptions, utilized by them only as a decorative feature in their theatres and amphitheatres, where in the form of semi-detached columns they formed divisions between the See also:arches; the same course was taken with the Ionic order, which, however, would seem to have been employed largely in porticoes. On the other See also:hand, the Corinthian order, in consequence of its See also:rich decoration, appealed more to the Roman See also:taste; moreover, all its faces were the same, and it could be employed in rectangular or in circular buildings without any difficulty. The earliest examples are found in the temple of See also:Castor and See also:Pollux at Cora, near See also:Rome, which is Greek in the See also:style of its See also:carving, and in the portico of the See also:Pantheon at Rome erected by See also:Agrippa (27 B.C.), where the Roman order is fully See also:developed. The next developments of the orders are those which followed the revival of classic architecture hi the 16th century, and these were largely influenced by the See also:discovery in 1456 of the See also:manuscript of Vitruvius, an architect who flourished in the latter half of the 1st century B.C. In his work De Architectura he refers constantly to drawings which he had pre-pared to illustrate his descriptions; these, however, have never been found, so that the translators of his work put their own See also:interpretation on his See also:text and published woodcuts representing the Roman orders as defined by him. They did not, however, confine themselves to the actual. remains, which in their See also:day were in much better preservation than at See also:present, but attempted to See also:complete the orders by the addition of pedestals to the columns, which were not employed by the Greeks, and only under See also:special conditions by the Romans; as, however, they are included in the two See also:chief authorities on the subject, See also:Palladio and Vignola, the text-See also:book of the former being the See also:standard in See also:England, and that of the latter in See also:France, the rules and proportions set forth in them for pedestals, as also for the employment of the superposing of the orders with arches between, will follow the See also:analysis of the Greek and Roman orders. The Greek Doric Order.—The Doric was the favourite order of the Greeks, and the one in which they introduced all their principal refinements; these were of so subtle a nature that until the site was cleared in 1837 their existence was not known, and the earlier explorers, though recognizing the extreme beauty of the proportions and some of the refinements, were unable to grasp the extent to which they were carried, and it was reserved for Penrose in 1846 to verify by micrometrical studies the theories put forward by Pennethorne and other authors. The whole structure of the Doric temple (which consisted of the columns, subdivided into shaft and capital, and the entablature, subdivided into architrave, frieze and cornice) rested on a See also:platform of three steps, of which the upper step was the See also:stylobate or column base (fig. r). The tread and rise of the steps varied in accordance with the diameter of the column; in temples of great dimensions, therefore, supplementary steps were provided for See also:access to the stylobate, or, as found in many temples, slight inclined planes. Resting on the stylobate was the shaft of the column, which was either monolithic or composed of frusta or drums. The shaft tapered as it See also:rose, the diminution of the upper diameter being more pronounced in See also:early examples, as in one of the temples at See also:Selinus and in the great temple at See also:Paestum. In the Parthenon at Athens the lower diameter is 6 ft. 3 in. and the upper 4 ft. 9 in., which gives a diminution slightly over one-See also:quarter of the lower diameter. The shaft was always fluted, with two or three exceptions, where the temples were not completed, and there were usually twenty flutes. In two temples at Syracuse, the most See also:ancient temple at Selinus, the e= . temple at Assos, and the temple at See also:Sunium there are only sixteen flutes; the flutes were elliptic in See also:section and intersected with an See also:arris. In order to correct an See also:optical illusion, which arises in a diminishing shaft, a slight See also:entasis or swelling in the centre was given, the greatest departure from the straight See also:line being about one-third up the shaft. The shaft was crowned by the capital, the juncture of the two being marked by a groove (ogle in the Parthenon, but up to three in more ancient examples) known as the hypotrachelion. Above this the trachelion or necking curves over, constructing what is known as the See also:apophyge up to the fillets, See also:round the base of the echinus, which forms the transition to the square abacus. The varying See also:curve of the echinus, from the earliest times down to the later examples, is shown in the See also:article on mouldings. The relative proportions of the lower diameter and the height of the columns vary according to the date of the example, in the early examples the column being just on 4 diameters high, in the Parthenon nearly 5i diameters, and in the Temple of See also:Jupiter Nemaeus 62 diameters high. The distance between the columns or See also:intercolumniation varied also according to the date, that of the earliest examples in Sicily being about I diameter (that between the See also:angle columns being always less), in the Parthenon in the proportion of r to I.24, and in the temple at Argos as I to 1'53. Above the columns rested the entablature (fig. 2), of which the lower member, the architrave, was See also:plain and crowned by a projecting See also:fillet, known as the See also:regula; under which, and below the See also:triglyph, was a fillet (See also:taenia), with six guttae underneath. The proportional height of the architrave, which was the chief sup- porting member, varied according to date, in one of the earliest examples at Syracuse being of greater See also:depth than the diameter of the column, and in the Parthenon about two-thirds of the diameter. Above the architrave was the frieze, divided into triglyphs, so called because they are divided into three bands by t w o vertical grooves, and metopes or spaces between the triglyphs. It is supposed that the triglyphs represented the beams in the See also:primitive See also:cella before the peristyle was added, the spaces between being filled with shutters or boards to prevent the temple being entered by birds. The See also:face of the metopes, which are nearly square, is set back behind that of the triglyphs, and is sometimes decorated with See also:sculpture in high See also:relief. There is generally one triglyph over each column and one between, but at each end of the temple there is a triglyph at the angle, so that the intercolumniation of the angle columns is less than that of the others, which gives a sense of increased strength. Above the frieze is the cornice, which projects forward about one-third of the diameter of the column and slopes down-wards at an angle generally the same as the slope of the roof. On its under See also:surface are mutules, one over each triglyph and one between, which are studded with guttae, probably repre• senting the wood pins which secured the rafters in their position Generally speaking, in the Doric temples there is no cymatium or See also:gutter, and the See also:rain See also:fell directly off the roof; in order to prevent it trickling down there was an upper moulding, throated, with a See also:bird's See also:beak moulding behind and a second throating near the bottom, so that the corona had an upper fillet projecting, and a lower fillet receding, from its See also:fascia See also:plane. The roof itself was covered with tiles in terra-See also:cotta or See also:marble, which consisted of See also:flat slabs with raised edges and covering tiles over the See also:joints; the lower ends of the covering tiles were decorated with antefixae, and the top of the roof was protected by See also:ridge tiles, on the top of Athens. which were sometimes additional antefixae placed parallel with the ridge See also:tile. As the mouldings of the See also:pediment were returned for a See also:short distance along the See also:side, there was a small cymatium or gutter with lions' heads, through the mouth of which the See also:water ran. In the principal and See also:rear front of the temple the lines of the cornice were repeated up the slope of the pediment, which coincided with that of the roof, and the tympanum, which they enclosed, was enriched with sculpture. On the centre of the pediment and at each end were pedestals (acroteria), on which figures, or conventional ornaments, were placed. Supplementary to the order at the back of the peristyle were See also:antae, slightly projecting pilasters which terminated the walls of the pronaos; these had a small base, were of the same diameter from the top to the bottom, and had a See also:simple moulded capital. The Greek Ionic Order.—The Ionic order, like the Doric, owes its origin to timber prototypes, but varies in its features; the columns are more slender, being from 8 to 9 diameters high, with an intercolumniation of sometimes as much as 2 diameters; the architrave also is subdivided into three fascia, which suggests that in its origin it consisted of three beams superposed, in contradistinction to that of the Doric architrave, which consisted of a single beam. As in the Doric order, the Ionic temple rested on a stylobate of three steps (fig. 3). The columns consisted of base, shaft and capital. In the Ionic examples the base consisted of a torus moulding, fluted horizontally, beneath which were three See also:double astragals divided by the See also:scotia, some-times, as in the temple at Priene, resting on a square See also:plinth. In the See also:Attic base employed in Athens, under the upper torus, which is either plain, fluted or carved with the See also:guilloche, is a fillet and deep scotia, with a second torus underneath. The shaft tapers much less than in the Doric order; it has a slighter entasis, and is fluted, the flutes being. elliptical in section but subdivided by fillets. The number of flutes is generally 24. The lower and upper parts of the shaft have an apophyge and a fillet, resting on the base in the former See also:case and supporting the capital in the latter. The capital consists of an See also:astragal, sometimes carved with the See also:bead and See also:reel, and an echinus moulding above enriched with the See also:egg-and-dart, on which rests the capital with See also:spiral volutes at each end, and from front to back with cushions which vary in design and enrichment. In the capitals of the angle columns the end volute is turned round on the See also:diagonal, so as to present the same See also:appearance on the front and the side; this results in an awkward arrangement at the back, where two half-volutes intersect one another at right angles. A small abacus, generally carved with ornament, crowns the capital. In early examples the channels between the fillets of the spiral are See also:convex, in later examples See also:concave. In the capitals of the Erechtheum (fig. 4), a greater richness is given by intermediary fillets. In all great examples the second fillet dips down in the centre of the front and a small See also:anthemion ornament marks the receding of the echinus moulding, which is circular and sometimes nearly merged into the See also:cushion. In the Erechtheum the enrichment of the capital is carried further in thenecking, which is decorated with the anthemion and divided off from the upper See also:part of the shaft by a bead and reel. The en-tablature is divided, like that of the Doric order, into architrave, frieze and cornice. The architrave is subdivided into three fasciae, the upper one See also:pro- jecting slightly beyond the lower, and crowned by small mouldings, the lower one sometimes carved with the Lesbian See also:leaf. Above this is the frieze, sometimes plain and at other times enriched with figure sculpture in See also:low relief. In the Ionian examples there was no frieze, its place being taken by dentils of great size and projection. The cornice consists of bedmould, corona and cymatium; in the Ionian examples the bedmould is of great richness, consisting of a lower moulding of egg-and-dart with bead and reel, a dentil course above, and another egg-and-dart with bead and reel above, sinking into the See also:soffit of the corona, which projects in the Ionian examples more than half a diameter. The corona consists of a plain fascia with moulding and cymatium above, and as the cymatium or gutter is carried through from end to end of the temple it is provided with lions' heads to throw off the water, and sometimes enriched with the anthemion ornament. In the Attic examples much greater simplicity, ascribed to Dorian influence, is given to the bedmould, in which only the See also:cyma-reversa with the Lesbian leaf carved on it and the bead and reel are retained. The mouldings of the cornice, including the cymatium, are carried up as a pediment, as in the Doric temple, and the See also:roofs are similar. The base and capital of the antae are more elaborate than in those of the Doric order, and are sometimes, both in Ionic and Attic examples, richly carved with the Lesbian leaf and egg-and-dart, in both cases with the bead and reel underneath. The chief variation from the usual entablature is found in that of the caryatide portico of the Erechtheum, where the frieze is omitted, dentils are introduced in the bedmould, paterae are carved on the upper fascia of the architrave, and the covering was a flat marble roof. The caryatide figures, the drapery of which recalls the fluting of the columns, stood on a See also:podium which enriched cornice and base. The Greek Corinthian Order (fig. 5).—As the entablature of this order was adapted by the Greeks from that of the Ionic order, the capital only need be described, and its See also:evolution from the earliest examples known, that in the temple at Bassae, to the fully developed type in the temple of Zeus Olympius at Athens, can be easily traced. It consisted of either a small range of leaves at the bottom, or of a bead-and-reel moulding, a bell decorated in various ways and a moulded abacus, the latter as a See also:rule being concave in See also:plan on each face and generally terminating in an arris or point. In the Bassae capital we find the first example of the spiral tendrils which rise up to and support the abacus with other spirals See also:crossing to the centre and the acanthus leaf and See also:flower. In the more perfected example of the Choragic V se. I I i See also:monument of Lysicrates (fig. 6), there is a lower range 'of small leaves of some See also:river plant, between which and the tops of the flutes (which here are turned over as leaves) is a sinking which was probably filled with a metal See also:band. From the lower range of leaves See also:spring eight acanthus leaves, bending forward at the top, with small See also:flowers between, representing the heads of nails which in the metal prototype fastened these leaves to the bell; from the caulicolae, on the right and See also:left, spring spiral tendrils rising to the angles under the abacus, and from the same caulicolae double spirals which See also:cross to the centre of the bell, the upper ones tarrying the anthemion flower, which rises across the abacus. The abacus in this capital has a deep scotia with fillet, and an echinus above, and is one of the few great examples in which the angles are canted. The architrave, frieze and cornice are adaptations from the Ionic order. The corona has in the place of the cymatium a cresting of antefixae, which is purely decorative, as there are no covering tiles, the roof of the monument being Corinthian Order Choragic monu- ment of Lysicrates. in one See also:block of marble carved with leaves. Set back and on the same plane as the architrave and frieze is a second cresting with the Greek See also:wave See also:scroll. There are other types of Greek Corinthian capital, of which the finest example is in the interior of the Tholos at Epidaurus (c. 400 B.C.), with two rows of leaves round the lower part, angle and central spirals, and a flower in the centre of the abacus. Of other examples the capitals of the interior of the temple of Apollo Branchidae in See also:Asia See also:Minor, and of the See also:vestibule at See also:Eleusis, and of the two porches of the temple of the Winds at Athens, are the best known. Except for the pointed ends of the abacus, which are Greek, the capital of the temple of Zeus Olympius might almost be classed among the Roman examples, and it is thought to have been the See also:model copied by the Romans from those which See also:Sulla took to Rome for the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus. The Roman Doric Order.—The earliest example of this order is probably that of the temple at Cora, about 20 M. from Rome,attributed to Sulla (8o B.C.), in which the leading features of the Greek Doric order are employed, but extremely degraded in style. The temple was raised on a podium with a See also:flight of steps in front; the shaft has 20 flutes and is carried on a small torus base, and the echinus of the capital is very poor. The architrave and triglyph-frieze are cut out of the same stone, the former being much too shallow to allow of its carrying the frieze and cornice. Two other early examples are those employed in the decoration of the arcades of the See also:Tabularium and of the See also:theatre of See also:Marcellus (fig. 7); they are only semi-detached. The Doric order was not a favourite with the Romans, and did not See also:appeal to their tastes for rich decoration; the only other examples known are those at See also:Praeneste, at Albano, and in the thermae of See also:Diocletian. At Albano the echinus of the capital is carved with the egg and See also:anchor, and in the thermae a cyma-recta carved with a leaf ornament takes the place of the echinus. There is no base to any of these examples, the Albano base consisting only of an apophyge and fillet, and only the Diocletian example is fluted. The Roman Ionic Order.—The complete degradation of the Ionic order is clearly shown in the so-called temple of See also:Fortuna Virilis (ascribed to about aoo B.c.), in the profuse decoration of architrave, frieze and cornice with coarse ornament, and, in the capital, the raising of the echinus to the same level as the top of the second fillet of the volute, so that it is no longer visible under the cushion. The shaft has twenty flutes, the fillet being much wider than in the Greek examples, and the See also:flute is semi-circular. Much more refinement is shown in the order as employed on the upper See also:storey of the theatre of Marcellus (fig. 8), where the only part enriched with ornament is in the egg and See also:tongue of the bedmould. In the capital the fillet of the volute runs across above the echinus, and the See also:canalis is stopped at each end over the volute, an original treatment. The most corrupt example of the Roman Ionic capital is that of the temple of See also:Saturn on the See also:Forum Romanum, which fortunately does not seem to have been copied later. The base of all the Roman Ionic columns is that known as the Attic base, viz. a lower and upper torus with scotia and fillets between, always raised on a square plinth. The Roman Corinthian Order.—The great varieties of design in the Greek Corinthian capital (fig. 9), and the fact that its entablature was copied from Ionic examples, suggests that no definite type sufficient to constitute an order had been evolved by the Greeks; it remained therefore a problem to be worked out by the Romans, who, with the assistance of Greek artists, employed generally by the Romans, not only in Rome but throughout Greece, Asia Minor and See also:Syria, developed an order which, though wanting in the refinement and subtlety found in Greek work, is one of the most monumental See also:kind, and has in its See also:adoption by the See also:Italian revivalists had more influence than any other in the raising of palatial structures. Even in Rome itself the portico of the Pantheon, erected by Agrippa (27 s.c.), and the temple of Castor (rebuilt by See also:Domitian A.D. 86) in the Forum, are remarkable in-stances of early work, which hold their own with some of the later examples even of Greek art. The develop- ment of the Roman Corinthian order will be best understood by a description in detail similar to See also:trave, like that of the Greek Ionic order, has three fasciae, but they are further elaborated by a small cyma-reversa under the upper fascia and a bead under the second fascia. The architrave is crowned with a moulding, consisting of a fillet with cyma-reversa and bead underneath. The frieze is plain, its only decoration being the well-known inscription of Agrippa. The bedmould consists of a bead, cyma-reversa and fillet, under a plain dentil course, in which the dentils are not carved; bead-and-reel and egg-anddart above these carried a plain face on which is found the new feature introduced by the Romans, viz. the modillion. This, though carved out of one solid block with the whole bedmould, suggested an appropriate support to the projecting cornice. The modillion was a bracket, a See also:horizontal version of the ancones which supported the cornice of the Greek doorway cornice, and was here crowned by a small cyma-reversa carved with leaves which profiled round the modillion and along the upper part of the plain face. The cornice is simple, consisting of a corona, fillet and cymatium, the latter omitted across the front of the temple, but carried up over the cornice of the pediment. All the columns are equidistant with an intercolumniation. of 22 diameters. The order of the interior of the rotunda built by See also:Hadrian (A.D. I2I) is similar to that of the portico, the lower moulding of the See also:bed-See also:mould and the bead being carved, and the tongue or anchor taking the place of the dart between the eggs. The order of the temple of Castor (fig. I) was enriched to a far greater extent, and parts were carved with ornament, which in Greek examples was probably only painted. The base was similar, but the columns (lo diameters high) had twenty-four flutes, with fillets between. The capital was further enriched with
foliage, which rising . from the caulicolae was carried along the See also:cavetto of the abacus, whose upper moulding was carved with the egg-and-dart. The See also:middle fascia of the architrave was carved with a version of the Greek anthemion, the cymareversa under the upper fascia being carved with leaves and bead-and-reel under. The lower moulding of the bedmould was carved with the egg-and-tongue; the dentil course was carved with finely proportioned dentils, the cyma-reversa and mouldings above being similar to those of the Pantheon portico. In the latter, on the soffit of the corona, square panels are sunk with a flower in the centre. In the temple of Castor the See also:panel is square, but there is a border in front and back, which shows that the cornice had a greater projection. The corona was carved with fluting, departing from the simplicity of the Pantheon example, but evidently more to the taste. of the Romans, as it is found in many subsequent examples. The intercolumniation is only two and one-third of the diameter. Though not quite equal to Greek foliage, that of the capitals of the temple of Castor is of great beauty, and there is one other feature in the capital
imiiuirnO1 1ui iI
Pantheon.
which is unique; the spirals of the centre are larger than usual and interlace one another. A variety of the bedmould of the cornice is found in the so-called Temple of the See also:Sun on the Quirinal See also: The Roman Composite Order.—As already noted, the Composite order differs from the Corinthian only in the design of its capital, which is a See also:compound of the foliage of the Corinthian and the volutes of the Ionic capital. Already, in the Ionic capital of the Erechtheum, a further enrichment with the anthemion was provided round the necking; this was copied in the capitals of the interior of See also:Trajan's See also:basilica; in Asia Minor at Aizani (1st century A.D.) a single See also:row of leaves was employed round the capitals of the pronaos under the volutes of an Ionic capital; the architect of the See also:Arch of See also:Titus (A.D. 81) went one step farther and introduced the double row of leaves; both examples exist in the Arch of Septimus See also:Severus (fig. 12), in the See also:tepidarium of the thermae of Diocletian; and, to See also:judge by the numerous examples still existing in the churches at Rome, it would seem to have been the favourite capital. The See also:Byzantine architects also based most of their capitals on the Roman Composite examples. There are other hybrid Roman capitals, in which figures of a winged Victory, rams' heads or cornucopia, take the place of the angle spirals of the Corinthian capital. The See also:Arcade Order.—This, which was defined by See also:Fergusson as the true Roman order, is a compound of two distinct types of construction, the arcuated and the See also:trabeated, the formerderived from the Etruscans, the latter from the Greeks. Whilst, however, the arcade was a constructive feature, the employment of the semi- or three-quarter detached column with its entablature complete, as a decorative See also:screen, was a See also:travesty of its original constructive function, without even the excuse of its adding in any way to the solidity of the structure, for the whole screen could be taken off from the Roman theatres and amphitheatres without in any sense interfering with their stability. The employment of the attached column only, as a vertical decorative feature subdividing the arches, might have been admissible, but to add the entablature was a See also:mistake, on account of the intercolumniation, which was far in excess of that employed in any order, so that not only was it necessary to cut the architrave into voussoirs, thus forming a flat arch, but the stones composing it had to be built into the See also:wall to ensure their stability; the entablature thus became an element of weakness instead of strength (fig. 13). The earliest example of the Arcade order is the Tabularium in Rome (8o B.C.) where it was employed to See also:light a vaulted See also:corridor See also:running from one end to the other of the structure and raised some 50 ft. from the ground. The column is semi-detached, 7i diameters high with an intercolumniation of nearly 4 diameters, and an entablature with an architrave which is less than half a diameter, quite incapable, therefore, of carrying itself, much less than the See also:rest of the entablature; the See also:impost See also:pier of the arch is half a diameter, and the height of the open arcade a little more than half its width. The shaft
had twenty-four flutes with arrises, and rested on a square plinth, and in the capital the echinus was only about one-twelfth of the diameter, the shallowest known. The frieze was divided by triglyphs, there being four between those over the See also:axis of each column; the correct number in the Greek Doric order being one. In the theatre of Marcellus there were three triglyphs; the impost pier was s diameter, thus giving greater solidity to the wall, but resulting in a narrower opening. The Tabularium had originally a second arcade above that now existing, with
11111!IIIIII111111111.111111111,
Vy1~Uar5::l~ilU.,?'i~i~i~MilNJwV too•.
Aw./flethiee
semi-detached columns of the Ionic order, and these are found in the upper storey of the theatre of Marcellus, the earliest example existing of the superposed orders. A certain proportion exists between the orders employed; thus the upper diameter of the Doric column (which is 71 diameters high with a diminution of between one-fifth and one-See also:sixth of the lower diameter) is the same as the lower diameter of the Ionic column, which is 81 diameters high and a much slighter diminution. In the Colosseum
I I1111'1 111uululI fIluw11111 I I.111uuuweuyi fFlIF uIU IumIi1uu
there were three storeys pierced with arcades, with the Corinthian order on the third storey, and a superstructure (added at a later date) without an arcade, and decorated with Corinthian pilasters only. Apparently this See also:scheme of decoration was considered to be the best for the purpose, and with some slight changes was employed for all the amphitheatres throughout the See also:Empire. The intercolumniation, on which the design is made, varies in the examples of later date. With an intercolumniation of 6 diameters, the arcades are wider and a lighter effect is obtained, and this is the proportion in the Colosseum.
The Five Orders; Italian.—The two Italian architects whose text-books with illustrations of the five orders have been accepted generally as the chief authorities on the subject are Vignolaand Palladio, the former in France and the See also:litter in England, the dates of the publication of their See also:works being 1563 and 1570 respectively. In 1759 See also:Sir See also: They all of them based their conjectural restorations on the descriptions given by Vitruvius, who, however, avoids using the same term throughout, the words genus, ratio, See also:species, mores being employed, from which it may be concluded that the Greeks themselves had no such term as that which is now defined as " order," especially as in his book he invariably quotes the Greek name when describing various parts of the temple. In the See also:preface to the fourth book he speaks only of the three orders (genus), so that the Tuscan described in Book IV. See also:chap. vii. would seem to have been an afterthought, and his description of the entablature shows that it was entirely in wood and therefore an incomplete development. The Italian revivalists, however, evolved one of their orders out of it and added a fifth, the Composite, of which there was no example in Rome before A.D. 82. In the d^scription which follows it must be understood that it refers only to the Italian version of what the revivalists considered the Roman orders to consist of, and as a rule Vignola's interpretation will be given, because he seems to have kept closer to Vitruvius's descriptions and to have taken as his See also:models the finest examples then existing in Rome. The Tuscan Order.—The base consists of a torus moulding, resting on square plinths; the shaft is terminated below by an apophyge and fillet and tapers upwards, the diminution being between one-quarter and one-fifth of the lower diameter, with an apophyge, fillet and astragal at the top, the capital consists of a square abacus with fillet and cavetto, an echinus, fillet and a necking; the whole column being 7 diameters high. The intercolumniation given by Vignola is 22 diameters, instead of the 32 diameters of Vitruvius's areostyle. The architrave, frieze and cornice, are simple versions of the Doric, except that there are no triglyphs in the frieze. The Doric Order.—In his Doric order Vignola has followed the Roman Doric order of the theatre of Marcellus, but he gives it a base consisting of an astragal and torus resting on a square plinth; in his shaft he copies the fluting (24 flutes) with the arris of the columns of the thermae of Diocletian; his capital, except the flowers decorating the necking and his entablature, are entirely taken from the theatre of Marcellus; in a second study he introduces an Attic base, carves the echinus of the capital with the egg-and-tongue, introduces two fasciae in his architrave, and to support the cornice provides shallow plain modillions with guttae on the soffits. In both the examples given the columns See also:taper upwards and are 8 diameters high. The Ionic Order.—For the Ionic order Vignola discards the temple of Fortuna Virilis, but enriches the order of the theatre of Marcellus, adopting the base of the temple of Castor and the fluted columns of the same; in his frieze he introduces that of the Corinthian temple of See also:Antoninus' and See also:Faustina, and in the bedmould and cornice copies that of the thermae of Diocletian. Palladio in his entablature introduces the convex friezes and adopts a single uncarved modillion under the cornice. In both cases the columns are fluted and 9 diameters high. The Corinthian Order.—In this order Vignola, for his base, returns to the temple of Castor, makes his columns 10 diameters high, copies the capital of the portico of the Pantheon, introduces a See also:rib frieze with winged See also:female figures and a See also:bull about to be sacrificed, and adopts the bedmould of the temple of Castor, See also:reversing the carving of two of the mouldings and the cornice, and omitting the fluting of the corona of that temple. In Palladio's Corinthian order the frieze is too narrow and the bedmould, though copied from the temple of Castor, is of smaller See also:scale. The Composite Order.—As in the Roman Composite order the only original feature was the capital, there were no new versions to be given of the entablature, but unfortunately they were unable to copy the many examples in Rome. In the three best-known capitals, those of the arches of Titus and Septimus RIM WI Tuscan. Doric. Ionic. Corinthian. Composite. FIG. 14.-The Italian Orders. Severus and in the thermae of Diocletian, the upper fillet of the volute runs straight across the capital, being partially sunk in the cavetto of the abacus; in the canalis of the volutes of all these examples is a band of foliage which dips down to carry the centre flower, and, on account of its projection, it hides, from those looking only from below, the upper fillet of the volute. The architects of the Revival, therefore, in their studies of the capital, turned the volutes (which they would seem, like See also:Ruskin, to have thought were horns) down on to the top of the echinus, producing a See also:composition which is not in accordance with ancient examples and shows See also:ignorance of the origin and development of the Ionic volute; unfortunately their interpretations of the Composite capital were followed by Inigo See also: Additional information and CommentsThere are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML. Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide. |
|
|
[back] ORDEAL (O.Eng. ordal, ordael, judgment) |
[next] ORDER (through Fr. ordre, for earlier ordene, from ... |