623 GREAT CIRCLE OR TANGENT SAILING. necessary preparation for those whose voyages were so short as to admit of the sides of a triangle on the globe being for ordinary purposes considered as straight lines: but the teaching of spherics to the navigator falling into disuse (by some extraordinary misconceptions), great circle sailing gradually became neglected, until for many years it was omitted in the standard works on navigation altogether. Even the attempt of Dr. Kelly, the mathematical examiner at the Trinity House nearly 50 years since, to renew the study of spheric projection, resulted in failure. Thus, while the sea officers of other nations are well prepared in that which forms not only the basis of great circle sailing, but of nautical astronomy, the energetic and intelligent mariners of England, although progressing in all else, were doomed for a time to wade in the pursuit of principles through works which as regards theory are somewhat too elaborate, and with respect to the rules of spheric construction are quite inadequate, for the mere navigator. Such was pre-eminently the state of things when the late skilful and lamented Lieutenant Henry Raper, R.N., produced his Practice of Navigation,' which forms the present text book of the Royal Naval service, and of the higher classes of merchant navigators. But even in this admirable work the doctrine of spheric construction has been omitted as evidently forming no supposed essential in a sea officer's training. The name of Raper must however be conspicuous as the regenerator of great circle sailing. In his work he gives excellent formula, but the use of logarithms arising from rules not understood by the uninitiated entails an effort of memory which is injuriously allowed to supplant the satisfaction which a conscious knowledge of principles would so unceasingly furnish. Notwithstanding this, Raper's solution of the "wearisome problem" of the great circle is eminently concise and practical, and for those who are content with spheric calculation, nothing more can be desired. Soon after Raper's work appeared, Mr. J. T. Towson, examiner in navigation at Liverpool, devised a set of tables, by means of which, and an ingeniously contrived diagram called a " linear index," together with the aid of dividers and scales, he so greatly simplified the matter as naturally to affect the commerce of the country, inasmuch as voyages which formerly occupied nearly 150 days were principally by means of great circle sailing, and, together with improvements in ship-building [CLIPPER], performed in about 70 to 80 days. Hence the subject has become one of large pecuniary moment; and it must here in justice to Mr. Towson be stated, that he generously presented to the Admiralty for public use the tables which had been constructed by him through years of very great labour. He has subsequently been enabled to further facilitate the question by adding to his tables, in 1854, a column containing the means of ascertaining at once the distance between a ship and her destined port. Various attempts have been lately made to supersede these tables: one of these deserves particular mention, not only from the elegance of the means employed, but from its leaving so little to be desired, although that little was important. It occurred to the Rev. Hugh Godfray, M.A., and to a merchant captain, Mr. Bergen, at about the same period, that a chart constructed on the gnomonic projection [GNOMONIC PROJECTION] would at once show the great circle track by laying any straight edge along the two given places: this certainly shows the track with great accuracy; but here again the aid of a second diagram, formed, too, by curves which convey at sight no elucidation of principles, was required in finding the "course and distance." Popular errors exist on this question which are worthy of special notice. Navigators are accustomed to use charts constructed on Mercator's projection, wherein all bearings are taken as straight lines, and these straight lines cross all the meridians at the same angle, and therefore offer a convenient mode of sailing and a ready means of finding a course and distance; but from reasons already given, as explained in applying a thread to a globe, the same error in actual distance must exist on Mercator's charts, where the parallels are represented as straight lines, as are found on the surface of the globe itself; for a parallel of latitude in neither case exhibits the nearest track between two places lying on it: therefore, if we wish to show on a Mercator's chart the nearest distance between such two places, it can only be represented by a curve, and as a mathematical line is that which is the nearest distance between two points, those who forget that the straight lines on the Mercator's chart are, to answer a specific purpose, themselves actually distortions, are liable to doubt the soundness of the principle of great circle tracks. And, again, a multitude of navigators at this day deny the possibility of sailing on a great circle curve, because, say they, such would require a continual change of course. As well may it be said that, because of the difficulties attending the quadrature of the circle, the use of the circle in ordinary mathematical computations is fallacious. This widely existing misapprehension would at once be demolished were this method of navigation called "tangent sailing;" such it really is; and the change of name was first proposed to the astronomer-royal in 1857 by Mr. Saxby: for it is the pecular property of great circle sailing that, in contradistinction to Mercator's, no two meridians are crossed at the same angle. All that need be done, therefore, by a navigator is, to sail as near to his great circle track as convenient, and each separate course will be a tangent to his track; and the shorter those tangent courses can be made the more will the duration of a voyage be diminished. But where a method is used, the principles of which are little understood (for the terms lat. of vertex, long. of vertex, &c., suggest a difficulty to the untrained student), a ship standing too long on one course is liable to be found hundreds of miles northward or southward of her desired position; and this will be found generally to arise from the captain's using too frequently during the passage the same latitude of vertex with which he started, and on which he calculated his courses for the voyage before leaving England. The following figure will illustrate this. It is the memorable and unexaggerated track of a celebrated clipper across the Atlantic to England in the autumn of 1856, one of the then shortest passages on record. In the above it will be seen that on the ship's being found at c (at some distance from the dotted great circle A F between the two places), she was, to save calculation, hauled up for the great circle track, instead of being navigated on a newly-found track, and with, of course, a newlyfound "latitude of vertex" in the tables used; while, on arriving at E, whither a heavy swell and S.E. wind had driven her, the captain abandoned his former track, and, prudently forming another, as at EF, completed his brilliant passage upon it with credit. From this it appears that facilities were wanted whereby to further simplify the finding of a great circle course and distance; and as the astronomer-royal, the Trinity Board, and the Local Marine Board of London, and the highest authorities, approve of the use of the "spherograph" as the readiest and most intelligible means of navigating on a great circle, a case in illustration of its applicability is given below. If we take two hemispheres on the stereographic projection, each having the usual meridians and parallels drawn thereon, and attach them so that they revolve concentrically, the upper one being made of some transparent material, we have the powerful patented instrument called the "spherograph." Its use in spheric navigation is as follows: suppose a ship to be in latitude 50° N., and bound to a port which is in lat. 10° N. and 60° difference of longitude westerly. The figure 2 will show the problem as set by the spherograph, in which the dotted lines are supposed to be seen through the upper sphere. The only manipulation required was the moving the under pole P to the ship's latitude, EQ being the equator. Then PD would evidently be the difference of latitude, and D X the difference of longitude, while PX would give at once the great circlet rack, and the angle X PD would show at once the course to be sailed; and counting the dotted parallels of the under sphere which cross P X, we evidently read off the number of degrees in the distance between P and x, which multiplied by 60 gives the nearest distance in geographical miles. Hence the course XPD (measured at 90° from the angular point P), or at CB, would be about 724° (or S. 724° W., because the diff. of lat. and diff. of long, are southerly and westerly by question), and the distance x P = about 634° x 603810 miles. The mathematician will have noticed that the useful problem of great circle sailing is solved in the spherograph by means of a triangle, differing from that generally used in its solution by calculation, an example of which it is essential to give. For while by the latter we use the two zenith distances with the difference of longitude, in the instrument we simply take the latitude in, and the latitude bound to, and the difference of longitude. Instead of using triangle x z P as in calculation, we use the rational triangle X PD. Fig. 5 represents the problem given in fig. 2, as adapted to the following computation: Let z P be the co. lat. 40°, and z x be the co. lat. 80°, and the angle PZX be the diff. of longitude 60°. To find the distance P X, and X PZ, the complement of the first great circle course. 54/30 20 10 Q 50 40 30 20 10 Course B required course; and being measured on CB, would give 50°, or (S. 50° W.), and the distance P X would be found as in fig. 2. Suppose, further, the next ascertained position of the ship to be in lat. 30° N., and the diff. of long. 30° (as before). The under pole p being Fig 4. 65 40 30 20 10 the distance in geographical miles. Q The instrument, however, has this advantage over all other methods, namely, it takes the simple data alone as they occur in practice, without there being necessity for the terms hitherto found convenient, such as lat. of vertex, long. from vertex, &c., or indeed even the co. latitudes, co. courses, &c., and the tyro is thus only using terms in the spherograph which he thoroughly comprehends. We have now shown that it is really easier to navigate on the great circle than by any other method. The applying of parallels to a common chart in order to obtain what is actually an erroneous course, occupies more time than using the spherograph to find the course which leads directly to the place bound to. If anything could be more simple, it is to be found in the tables which accompany the instrument, and which are derived from spheric moved to 30° N., would show the problem as in fig. 4, which would be calculation, and have no connection with the diagrams, except that solved as in the above, giving the course about 60° or S. 60° W. Fig. 5. The intersection of the vertical and horizontal lines at " 60," having reference to the data, shews the great circle course to be S. 60° W., as measured at BC (fig. 4). The not easy consideration of composite sailing [SAILINGS], is henceforth entirely superseded by the following general rule in determining the course of a voyage, and its importance to maritime commerce cannot be over-rated. A navigator with the chart before him, and possessing a spherograph, will in future reason thus with himself: "Being anxious to make the shortest possible voyage, I must not let great circle sailing take me into difficulties as to dangers, baffling winds, ice, &c.; no, I shall for very many reasons like to place my ship there and there, on my route" (at the same time marking dots on his chart to indicate such places). We need only imagine P in fig. 2, to be one of those dots, and x another, always supposing one of the places to lie on the primitive circle, which in all cases represents the ship's meridian-and the extreme simplicity of this new method by spherograph, to the total exclusion of what has been called composite" sailing, will be at once apparent. 66 Hitherto whatever obstacles may have prevented the general renewal of the practice of great circle, or tangent, navigation, a knowledge of such obstructions has been confined almost to navigators alone; but henceforward (and our so thorough investigation of this important subject as a national question bearing with weight upon extensive interests, has been with this object) it will remain with shipowners and underwriters to see that their treasure is conveyed from place to place in the shortest possible time; for to take a melancholy example, it must not be forgotten that had the unfortunate "Royal Charter" been able, by any extra facilities possessed by her late accomplished Captain, to reach Point Lynas even twelve hours earlier, the awful catastrophe which desolated so many homes, and wrung so many hearts, would most probably have been averted. GREAVES. [ARMOUR.] GRECIAN ARCHITECTURE. The most ancient constructional remains in Greece are the rude pre-historic masses of masonry known as Cyclopæan, from their being attributed by early tradition to the fabulous Cyclopes. They consist chiefly of walls formed of huge shapeless blocks of stone, having the interstices filled up with smaller but equally rude blocks. Of a less uncertain but still remote period are the Pelasgic remains, which, though remarkable rather as constructive works than as works of art, are yet for many reasons not devoid of interest in the history of architecture. They belong however to a non-Hellenic people, and have little affinity with the true Grecian architecture; and therefore will be noticed under a separate head. [PELASGIC ARCHITECTURE.] proofs of the exquisite taste and skill which the Greeks could exert on their less important secular structures. Greek architecture differs from all subsequent styles in being non. arcuated. Whether the Greeks were acquainted with the arch or not, they did not employ it in their public buildings. The great construc tive feature is the beam. Greek architecture consequently is essentially horizontal in principle: its primary lines are horizontal, its secondary vertical. Hence stability, solidity, are its constant characteristics. Yet though rectilinear in appearance it is not strictly so in fact. So sensitive was the Greek eye to the slightest deviation from perfect beauty of expression, that the architects resorted to a singularly refined contrivance to overcome an optical illusion so small that no other people probably would ever have noticed it. Right lines when protracted far above or on either side of the spectator no longer seem perfectly straight, but are slightly bent in accordance with the laws of perspective. Contrasting right lines, and even contrasts of light and shade in like manner cause an appearance of deflection. To remedy these and other corresponding effects, it has been recently found that not only did the Greeks, as has long been known, give their columns a slight entasis, or swell near the middle, but they made the boundary line a delicate parabolic curve; and instead of placing the axes of the columns as was always supposed quite vertical, they inclined them in a small measure inwards. They also gave to the pavements on which the columns rested, and the steps of their temples, a minutely convex character, the rise in the centre being about three inches in a hundred feet. Further, the horizontal lines of the entablature were curved in a precisely correspondent manner, and other minor adjustments made. But all these minute curves were executed with such exquisite knowledge and skill, that the effect was simply that of rendering the spectator unconscious of any deviation from a mathematical right line; and it is only by the most careful observation that the contrivance is even now detected. The discovery of these curves was made by Mr. J. Pennethorne, in 1837, and soon afterwards (we believe independently) by Messrs. Hofer and Schaubert; but their existence was placed beyond doubt, and the principles upon which they were carried out clearly evolved by Mr. Penrose, who spent a considerable time in Greece investigating the subject and making careful and repeated admeasurements: the results of his researches were embodied in his Society in 1851. These refined optical corrections seem to have been always most perfectly developed in temples of the Doric order, but they are found more or less in most others. Without here entering upon an examination of the history of Grecian architecture, we may briefly observe that it is now generally admitted that, although in its ultimate development it is beyond dispute the creation of the Hellenic mind, the germs of it were derived from the architecture of older nations: its grander elements and more solid proportions from Egypt; its lighter characteristics and more ornate features from Asia. The great distinction of Grecian archi-'Principles of Athenian Architecture,' published by the Dilettanti tecture lies in its orders: these are the Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian. Of these the Doric is the oldest, and it is noteworthy not only that in the oldest known example, a temple at Corinth of the 7th century, B.C., are the proportions far more massive and the whole more pervaded by Egyptian feeling than in later temples, but that there still exists a tomb at Beni Hassan in Nubia, supposed to be of the age of Rameses II., at the entrance of which are two fluted columns clearly the prototypes of the Grecian Doric; while, as Sir G. Wilkinson has shown (‘Ancient Egyptians,' vol. ii. p. 125, and Plate vii.), the characteristic Doric fret border was also a common Egyptian ornament. The more graceful Ionic order, on the other hand, may clearly be traced to Asia. As Mr. Fergusson has pointed out, there occur in the ruins of Persepolis several columns which have the Ionic volutes, but placed vertically instead of borizontally. On slabs found in Khorsabad by M. Botta, however, and in others brought from the same locality, and now in the British Museum, are sculptured representations of buildings with columns crowned with volutes precisely as in the Greek Ionic. The Ionic guilloche ornament is also found both at Persepolis and Khorsabad. The latest of the three Greek orders, the Corinthian, is equally a derived one with the others. As was shown in the article COLUMN, the bell of the Corinthian capital of the temple of Apollo at Bassæ, near Phigaleia, closely resembles the Egyptian capitals placed alongside it; and in one of the two remaining Corinthian buildings in Greece, the Tower of the Winds, at Athens, there are no volutes to the capitals, and the leaves of water-lilies adhere, as in Egyptian examples, close to the bell. But if the architecture of the Greeks, like that of every other people, was derived rather than invented, all that gave to it its life and power is its own. The exquisite feeling for beauty of proportion, majestic simplicity of form, truth and purity of expression, and perfect adaptation to its purpose, all those higher constructive and aesthetic qualities, in short, which place it so far above the architecture of all other countries, only Greece can lay claim to. The religious edifices of a people are nearly always the surest indication of the state of their architectural tastes and ability. Fortunately perhaps the temples are almost the only buildings of ancient Greece which have come down to the present day in a sufficiently uninjured condition to permit of our forming a fair estimate of them. The oldest left is believed to have been built about the middle of the 7th century, B. C.; one or two others are of the 6th century, but the finer examples belong to the 5th and 4th centuries, B. C. The classes, forms, and architectural character of the temples will be described under that title. [TEMPLE.] The public buildings devoted to secular purposes of which any remains exist consist chiefly of theatres, agora, thermæ, &c., and these too are noticed elsewhere. [THEATRE; FORUM; BATH, &c.] Of the palatial residences and private houses, only imperfect written descriptions are left. One or two small monuments however, as the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates, and the Tower of the Windsboth comparatively late works and both Corinthian in style-remain as It is in Doric temples too that another great artistic feature was most effectively developed, namely that of the introduction of sculptural ornamentation. In all Greek temples sculptured ornament was freely introduced, but in the nobler Doric temples it appears in its greatest perfection. In the cella were introduced friezes in low relief; in the metopes alti-relievi, and in the tympanum of the pediment statues entirely detached. And that these were, at least in some instances, the masterworks of the sculptor's art we have evidence in those marvellous reliques which once adorned the Parthenon, and are now the glory of the British Museum [ELGIN MARBLES], while that their adjustment to their respective places was the result of a perfect knowledge of sculpturesque effect may be seen by a reference to the article ALTO-RELIEVO. The polychromatic decoration of the temples will be spoken of elsewhere. [POLYCHROMY.] The three Greek orders characterise three periods in Grecian architecture much as the three styles of Pointed Gothic characterise three important phases in English architecture. Doric, the oldest, corresponding in seniority and character to our First Pointed, the true English Doric, is marked by a sober grandeur and simple dignity, yet withal is preeminently beautiful. The Ionic, which follows in order of time, more graceful, easy, and flowing in style, corresponds not inaptly to our Second Pointed or Decorated. While the luxuriant Corinthian, the product of the later years of Greek art, and the herald of its decline, finds its parallel in our florid Third Pointed or Perpendicular. [GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE.] But in one respect there was a broad difference. The Gothic of either class was the exclusive style of its epoch. The Decorated did not tolerate the Early English, nor the Perpendicular the Decorated. The Greek orders, though they were the product of different ages continued to flourish contentedly together. Ionic did not suppress Doric nor Corinthian Ionic, but the elder and the younger simultaneously filled the places for which each seemed most fitted. Before noticing somewhat more in detail the orders of Grecian architecture, it is necessary to explain that what is termed an Order consists of two principal divisions, the Column and the Entablature-i. e., the upright support and the horizontal mass supported by it. The Column is again divided into Base, Shaft, and Capital (except in the Doric order, where the shaft rests immediately upon the flooring.) The Entablature is also divided into three parts—the Architrave, or Epistylium, Frieze, and Cornice. These together constitute the Order; which is further distinguished as belonging either to the Doric, the Ionic, or the Corinthian style, according to certain general proportions and characteristic embellishments. The scale for the proportions-that is, not the actual but the relative dimensions of the different parts com pared with each other-is taken from the lower diameter of the shaft of the column, which is divided into two modules or sixty minutes. Modern systematisers, who have laid great stress upon proportions, have, contrary to the practice of the Greeks themselves, attempted to fix certain invariable proportions for each order; and some have maintained that by them, quite as much as by peculiarities of detail and embellishment, the character of an order is determined. In regard to proportions, however, even greater discrepancy is found between different examples of the same order, than between two distinct orders. We must therefore attend to certain indicial features and marks by which the particular order may be immediately recognised; thus the absence of base or mouldings at the bottom of the column, the plain capital composed of merely an echinus and abacus, and a triglyphed frieze, enable us to pronounce at once that the order is the Doric. In like manner the voluted capital, or the foliaged one, as distinctly denotes that it is either Ionic or Corinthian. In regard to the two last-mentioned, the principal distinction between them is confined to the capital; there being no other determinate difference between the columns or the entablatures of the one or the other. Were we to see only the shaft of the column, we should be able to decide from that alone whether it were Doric or not; the flutings peculiar to that order being broad and shallow, and forming sharp ridges or arrises on the circumference of the shafts; whereas in the other two they are narrower and deeper, rounded at their extremities, and divided from each other by fillets or spaces left between the channels on the surface of the shaft. In like manner were we to see the fragment of an architrave, we could pronounce with tolerable certainty whether it was Doric or not; although in the latter case not quite so clearly whether it was Ionic or Corinthian. The Doric architrave consists of a single plain face surmounted by a broad fillet, here termed the tania, to which another fillet with small cylindrical gutta or drops is attached beneath each triglyph; but the architraves of the other two orders are divided into (generally) three faces or faciæ, slightly projecting one above the other, and crowned by curved mouldings, sometimes plain, but more frequently enriched. By attending to these few simple and obvious distinctions, no one can feel any difficulty in ascertaining the particular order to which a building belongs. Illustrations are given of the details of the entablatures of the several orders under COLUMN. Doric Order.-In attentively examining the Grecian Doric, we can hardly fail to note what admirable taste and study of effect it exhibits throughout, and how every part is made to conduce to the character of the whole. The columns are of short proportions, the entablature deep; the former have no bases, which, owing to the narrowness of the inter-columns, would have proved highly inconvenient, and instead of producing an air of finish would rather have occasioned heaviness. The proportions themselves are such as to reject any addition of that kind at the lower extremity of the column, because the difference between the upper and lower diameter-which, owing to the shortness of the shaft, occasions so visible an inclination as to produce the effect of tapering upwards-causes it also to appear to spread out below in such manner that the lower extremity becomes a sufficiently wide basis. This inclination is further rendered more apparent than it would be by the outline alone of the column, owing to the lines being repeated in the fluting. The fluting, while it diminishes the heaviness, produces great variety of light and shade in every direction; and the mode of fluting peculiar to this order is admirably in unison with the expression of all the rest, the channels being wide and shallow, and separated from each other by mere ridges on the surface; both which circumstances contribute to that breadth and simplicity which pervade the other parts. No less appropriate and well imagined is the capital, which consists of little more than an echinus and deep square abacus above it; the former expanding itself out from the neck, or upper part of the column, until its diameter becomes equal to that of the foot of the column: in reality, it is something greater, but not more so than is requisite to counteract the apparent diminution caused by the greater distance from the eye. Thus harmony is kept up between both extremities of the column, verticality is restored, the projection above (as in the case of the sloping wall and coved cornice of Egyptian structures) is made to restore perpendicularity by adding just as much as had been taken away by the diminution of the shaft upwards, and a play, variety, and contrast are produced, unattainable by any other mode. The architrave is plain and deep, well proportioned both as to the weight which it has to bear and to the column below, its average height being equal to the upper diameter or narrowest part of the column. The width of its soffit, or under side, is about a medium between the two extreme diameters, so that it overhangs the upper ARTS AND SCI. DIV. VOL. IV. support its pressu re. The frieze is generally of the same dimensions as the architrave, very rarely deeper, in some examples not so deep. The triglyphs which decorate it, and are peculiar to the order itself, are upright, sligh tly projecting tablets (in width rather more than half the lower diameter), channelled with two grooves or glyphs (yλupai), and with a half groove chamfering off each of its outer edges. The spaces between these ornaments, which were originally intended to represent the extremities of the beams (whether stone or timber) resting upon the architrave and forming the inner roof or ceiling are M M square, or nearly so, and are distinguished by the name of metopes The sloping or raking cornices of the pediment resemble the horizontal one, except that there the mutules are omitted. In order, however, to give increased depth and importance to the pediment, as the finish of the whole structure, its cornices have an additional member, termed by some the epitithedas, consisting of an ovolo, or convex moulding, or a cymatium; sometimes deeper, sometimes shallower. This epitithedas was continued a little way at the angles, where it usually terminated against a block, carved with a lion's head, or some other ornament. The face of the pediment itself, termed the tympanum (called by the Greeks άerós, déтwμa), was almost always filled with sculpture. The pediment was invariably of a low pitch, but not always of the same pitch; on the contrary, whatever the span might be, its height continued nearly the same, it being more or less acute, in proportion as the portico was narrow or broad: its average Front Elevation of the Temple of Egina, as restored. height was equal to that of the entablature, and either a little diminished or increased according to circumstances, but hardly ever so much as to render the tympanum deeper than the entablature. The accompanying cut showing the portico of the Doric temple of Athene at gina as restored, will illustrate many of the leading characteristics of the Doric style as here pointed out. A list of the principal Doric temples is given under COLUMN; as convenient practical examples of this order, where the reader may study its character, and learn to distinguish, in actual buildings, the various members and particulars here pointed out, not, be it remembered, as faithful illustrations of the aesthetic principles of Grecian Doric-we refer to the portico entrance to the North-Western Railway Terminus, Euston Square, and the Corn-Market, Mark Lane, in which latter the frieze is decorated with wreaths instead of triglyphs-as in the monument of Thrasyllus at Athens-and consequently the spaces between them cannot be called metopes. In the Ionic Order the column differs widely from that of the Doric, not only in the form of its capital, and in having a base, but in the contour of its shaft and the mode of fluting, it being more slender and not tapering so suddenly. The base is generally that termed the Atticbase, composed of two tori, or convex rings, with a concave moulding, the scotia, between them; for as the Doric character demands plane surfaces and lines, so does the Ionic require curved mouldings and contours, as harmonising with the curved forms of the volutes of the capitals. To prevent the harshness which would result, if the mouldings forming the base jutted out abruptly from the lower end of the shaft, the latter is made to spread itself out immediately above the base in a sweeping curve, termed the apophyge. The number of the flutings of the shaft is increased from twenty to twenty-four; besides which there are spaces left between them (fillets); for the mere arrises or sharp edges, peculiar to the Doric or earliest mode of fluting, would be utterly at variance with the rounded contours of the base and capital. The channels themselves being thus multiplied and set apart from each other, are consequently much narrower than those of the other order, and considerably deeper in proportion to their breadth; and instead of terminating in flattish curves, their extremities are made the half of a circle, or an ellipse: all which circumstances contribute to uniform delicacy of expression. It should be observed, too, that the upper torus of the base was generally fluted horizontally, thereby producing uniformity of decoration between that and the shaft, with contrast as to the mode of applying it. When not so fluted, that torus was sometimes enriched with a guilloche, a beautiful sort of chain-like ornament sculptured on its surface: see example in the cut of the base of an Ionic column from the Erechtheium under COLUMN. The capital may be described generally as consisting of two faces, about as wide, measured across the volutes, as the base-that is, a diameter and a half, or 90 minutes; which breadth is divided into three equal parts (more or less), 30 minutes being allowed for each volute. These volutes are composed of spiral mouldings, which make several revolutions, and gradually become narrower as they approach what is termed the eye or cathetus; in the richer capitals of this class there are intermediate spirals, following the course of the other; the spaces or interspirals, forming slightly concave surfaces (see diagram under COLUMN). In all the Athenian examples there is also a flowing or festoon hem forming the lower edge of the face between the volutes, whose curve harmonises most beautifully with the outline of the volutes themselves; whereas, in the capital of the Asiatic Ionic, as well as the Roman and modern Italian, the volutes are here connected by a straight line. Immediately beneath this part of the capital is a carved convex moulding, to which succeeds the echinus or ovolo (so called because cut into the form of eggs), and lesser mouldings. The idea of an lonic capital therefore seems to have been that of introducing an ornamental mass between the echinus and abacus of the earlier shaped capital, and rolling up its deep projecting extremities into volutes. Besides the capital (properly so speaking, where additional richness was required, and also increased height for the column, without much increasing that of the shaft), a necking, enriched with sculpture, and separated from the shaft by a carved convex moulding, was introduced. The abacus is square in plan, and its sides form a cyma reversa, or ogee moulding, either carved or plain, according as the capital itself is more or less enriched. But the capital itself, at least that portion of it occupied by the volutes, is not so deep on its sides as on the two faces; the reason for which is obvious, because either those faces must have been much narrower, or if this part formed a perfectly square mass of a diameter and a half, it would overhang the upper parts of the shaft, and project beyond the architrave in a most unsightly manner. The baluster sides of the volutes, as they are termed, are, for the sake of elegance and lightness, hollowed out so as to assume something of the appearance of two tubes or horns, whose broader extremities or mouths come against the back of the volutes. The capitals at the angles of a portico are frequently differently arranged, since, in order to obtain a face on the return similar to that in front, the outer volute is turned diagonally, so as to serve for both faces; a mode adopted for all the capitals, without distinction, by many Italian architects. The architrave is divided into three nearly equal faciæ, projecting very slightly one over the other, and crowned by a cyma recta moulding, carved or plain, as the rest happens to be more or less enriched. The caryatid figures, which in some buildings of this order supply the place of columns, are noticed under CARYATIDES. The cornice in Athenian examples is exceedingly simple, consisting only of two mouldings beneath the corona, the uppermost being within the hollowed soffit of that member; nor do dentils, which are generally reckoned the distinguishing marks of the Ionic cornice, appear to have been used, except by the Asiatic Greeks. Consequently, |