DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.8#0195
t 1Ö4 )
text, in the base, iti his plate xix, the profile intended
by Vitruvius, is not correct ; such contraction of all the
members gives an appearance of weakness to the base,
and in the design exhibited in the treatise alluded to*
the torus and plinth appear so nearly of the same pro-
jecture as to produce a miserable effect, every thing
under the great torus at top, appearing diminutive and
trifling;
And it is not merely this error of attributing Vitru-
vius's words, "spirae quoquoversus," to the plinth, but
the additional error of not attending to the import of
the term superciliuni, has, more than any other mistake,
contributed to ruin the aspect of this base¿ In the bases,
in the Olympian Temple at Athens, the fillet under
the superior torus, which Perrault and all the moderns
project about equal with the fillet of the apophyge, is
there projected equal to the projecture of the torus over
it, as already observed ; and this fillet or cincture, sup-
ported at it's extreme projection by the upper part of
the scotia, to which it belongs, is, from it's appearance,
called by Vitruvius superciliuni, and in no other situation
does he give this small square such a denomination, but
either quadra, lysis, or annulet ; and this sufficiently
shews a peculiarity when it is termed supercilium,
which properly signifies eye brow.—By a due attention
to this circumstance, wholly unnoticed by the moderns,
the aspect of the base will have the appearance, so much
wanted in the modern designs, of a very sufficient soli-
dity to support it's incumbents ; and also by taking
both the small astragals out of the height assigned to
the upper scotia, as Vitruvius clearly orders, and not by
dividing between the astragals as all the moderns have;
then will this Ionic base, with the plinth projecting 45
minutes, be duly formed to the mind of Vitruvius.
I»
text, in the base, iti his plate xix, the profile intended
by Vitruvius, is not correct ; such contraction of all the
members gives an appearance of weakness to the base,
and in the design exhibited in the treatise alluded to*
the torus and plinth appear so nearly of the same pro-
jecture as to produce a miserable effect, every thing
under the great torus at top, appearing diminutive and
trifling;
And it is not merely this error of attributing Vitru-
vius's words, "spirae quoquoversus," to the plinth, but
the additional error of not attending to the import of
the term superciliuni, has, more than any other mistake,
contributed to ruin the aspect of this base¿ In the bases,
in the Olympian Temple at Athens, the fillet under
the superior torus, which Perrault and all the moderns
project about equal with the fillet of the apophyge, is
there projected equal to the projecture of the torus over
it, as already observed ; and this fillet or cincture, sup-
ported at it's extreme projection by the upper part of
the scotia, to which it belongs, is, from it's appearance,
called by Vitruvius superciliuni, and in no other situation
does he give this small square such a denomination, but
either quadra, lysis, or annulet ; and this sufficiently
shews a peculiarity when it is termed supercilium,
which properly signifies eye brow.—By a due attention
to this circumstance, wholly unnoticed by the moderns,
the aspect of the base will have the appearance, so much
wanted in the modern designs, of a very sufficient soli-
dity to support it's incumbents ; and also by taking
both the small astragals out of the height assigned to
the upper scotia, as Vitruvius clearly orders, and not by
dividing between the astragals as all the moderns have;
then will this Ionic base, with the plinth projecting 45
minutes, be duly formed to the mind of Vitruvius.
I»