( 85 >
it's columns, (the principal consideration in the present
discussion,) to exceed both the Parthenon and Olympian
also : and it's intercolumns so much more extended than
in either of those Temples, as to render the width within»
though only of 2 columns and 3 intercolumns, nearly
equal to the internal width of the Parthenon ; though
the said width, in that Temple, comprises 4 columns
and 5 intercolumns for it's hypetral cell. And the
Olympian Temple also has 4 columns and 5 intercolumns
for the extent of the width in question.
Now to value this extent in feet and inches of our
measure, it is only requisite to know the value of the
diameter of the column, and the number of diameters in
the intercolumns. And by comparing the said extent,
in the Olympian and Parthenon, both known to be hy-
pethre, with the extent (obtained by numbering and
valuing the diameters contained) of the internal width
in the Ephesian, a judgment may be formed of it's ca-
pacity, whether equal to the purposes of an hyphethral
cell, or not.
In the grand Olympian at Athens, the diameter of
the column is ascertained, by Mr. Stuart in his 2, Vol»
to be ft.6, in.3, English, and the intercolumn ft.ll,
in.9.3; 4 diameters, then, = ft.25, and 5 intercolumns
ft.58, in.I0.5; the sum of these = ft.83, in.10.5, the
width of the cell of this Temple, one of the wonders of
the world for magnificence.
In the Parthenon, the width is given by Mr. Stuart
in his plate 2, Vol. % Chap. 1, at ft.62, in.6.
And, in the Ephesian Temple, the diameter is now
ascertained to be ft.7, in.l, 572855. Then 2 diameters
= ft.l4, in.3, 14571, and being systyle ft.14, in.3,14571
is the intercolumn, which three times taken, is = to
t g ft,43
it's columns, (the principal consideration in the present
discussion,) to exceed both the Parthenon and Olympian
also : and it's intercolumns so much more extended than
in either of those Temples, as to render the width within»
though only of 2 columns and 3 intercolumns, nearly
equal to the internal width of the Parthenon ; though
the said width, in that Temple, comprises 4 columns
and 5 intercolumns for it's hypetral cell. And the
Olympian Temple also has 4 columns and 5 intercolumns
for the extent of the width in question.
Now to value this extent in feet and inches of our
measure, it is only requisite to know the value of the
diameter of the column, and the number of diameters in
the intercolumns. And by comparing the said extent,
in the Olympian and Parthenon, both known to be hy-
pethre, with the extent (obtained by numbering and
valuing the diameters contained) of the internal width
in the Ephesian, a judgment may be formed of it's ca-
pacity, whether equal to the purposes of an hyphethral
cell, or not.
In the grand Olympian at Athens, the diameter of
the column is ascertained, by Mr. Stuart in his 2, Vol»
to be ft.6, in.3, English, and the intercolumn ft.ll,
in.9.3; 4 diameters, then, = ft.25, and 5 intercolumns
ft.58, in.I0.5; the sum of these = ft.83, in.10.5, the
width of the cell of this Temple, one of the wonders of
the world for magnificence.
In the Parthenon, the width is given by Mr. Stuart
in his plate 2, Vol. % Chap. 1, at ft.62, in.6.
And, in the Ephesian Temple, the diameter is now
ascertained to be ft.7, in.l, 572855. Then 2 diameters
= ft.l4, in.3, 14571, and being systyle ft.14, in.3,14571
is the intercolumn, which three times taken, is = to
t g ft,43