í m )
himself has afterwards delineated, in the open prönäo%
of the Minerva Polias.) Vitruvius no mòre assimilates-
the deviation here in question tö the Parthenon* than
to the Pantheon at Rome, and whoever will peruse the
7 chap* 4 book, will find it wholly apertains to Tuscan
Temples.
As to Mr. Stuart's eorrectidn of the term, extsoñd,
it is very similar to some of Perraulf s. I have before
said full as much on this teriiis as the Word< or his cor-
rection of it, is worth. The sequel of the explanation
of the plate % is 80 replete with blunders, founded on
the previous mistake, that I cannot persuade myself to
believe Mr. Stuart was the author of them; of if be was,
that bis ill state of health, and embarrassment of mind,
at the time he put the materials together, which com*
pòse this, and some other parts of the letter press*
rendered him incapable of accurate recollection* And*
it is much to be wisbed, that the above, and some other
glaring inconsistencies, in the printed copies, that ao*
company the useful, and interesting designs, published
in tbe plates, were duly revised, and such degrading
passages as the above and subsequent, rectified ; which
raight be printed in very few sheets, and published,
both for tbe credit, as well as for the further utility, of
so excellent and so valuable a collection of designs. I
hope the Society of the Délitant i, may at a future time,
take the matter into their consideration, and render the
present printed expositions more concordant with the
plates?. They must be convinced, how exactly the Mi-
nerva Polias, coincides with "Vitruvius's first variation
from the plan of a Tuscan Temple, With which he be-
gins his 7 chap. 4 book: and that the Parthenon is totally
foreign from every kind of Tuscan Temples, set forth
by
himself has afterwards delineated, in the open prönäo%
of the Minerva Polias.) Vitruvius no mòre assimilates-
the deviation here in question tö the Parthenon* than
to the Pantheon at Rome, and whoever will peruse the
7 chap* 4 book, will find it wholly apertains to Tuscan
Temples.
As to Mr. Stuart's eorrectidn of the term, extsoñd,
it is very similar to some of Perraulf s. I have before
said full as much on this teriiis as the Word< or his cor-
rection of it, is worth. The sequel of the explanation
of the plate % is 80 replete with blunders, founded on
the previous mistake, that I cannot persuade myself to
believe Mr. Stuart was the author of them; of if be was,
that bis ill state of health, and embarrassment of mind,
at the time he put the materials together, which com*
pòse this, and some other parts of the letter press*
rendered him incapable of accurate recollection* And*
it is much to be wisbed, that the above, and some other
glaring inconsistencies, in the printed copies, that ao*
company the useful, and interesting designs, published
in tbe plates, were duly revised, and such degrading
passages as the above and subsequent, rectified ; which
raight be printed in very few sheets, and published,
both for tbe credit, as well as for the further utility, of
so excellent and so valuable a collection of designs. I
hope the Society of the Délitant i, may at a future time,
take the matter into their consideration, and render the
present printed expositions more concordant with the
plates?. They must be convinced, how exactly the Mi-
nerva Polias, coincides with "Vitruvius's first variation
from the plan of a Tuscan Temple, With which he be-
gins his 7 chap. 4 book: and that the Parthenon is totally
foreign from every kind of Tuscan Temples, set forth
by