t . »•••■•

Part II. five Kinds ofi Columns.

when they are plac’d low, and but little above the Eye, led chefshould seem to have too little Projecture. In the same manner mSculpture, they would have those Figures which are to be set ac aDistance, made larger, bolder, and more rude, that they mi^htnot appear too mean and obscure 5 and that such Statues as areplac’d in very high Niches, bend forward, that they may not seemto lean backwards.

I begin the Examinations of these Reasons by matter of Fact,and do affirm, that there are no Instances of the Practice of this’Rule of the Change of Proportions, and that if some may possiblybe met with, we are not to think this Change was made for anyReasons from the Optics, but only by chance, since these Changeshave not been practis’d in the most approved Buildings.

T o begin with the Diminution of Columns, we find that thelargest, and least, have the fame Diminution in the Antique , andthat there are small ones, which have even less than the largest.The great Columns of the Temple of Peace, of the Portico of thePantheon, those of Campo Vaccino , and of the Basilic of Jntonine , thevery Shafts of which are between forty and fifty Foot high, havethe fame Diminution as those of the Temple of (Bacchus, where theShaft is scarce ten Foot high. But those of the Temple of Faustina,of the Porch of Septimius, of the Baths of Diocletian, and of theTemple of Concord , whose Shafts have from thirty to forty Foot inHeight, have even more Diminution than those of the Arches ofTitus, of Septimius, and of Constantine, whose Shafts have no morethan from fifteen to twenty Foot. ’Tis plain, then, that the dif-ferent Diminution of these Columns was not determin’d by anyRules of the Optics, since the tallest having a great Diminution,and the shortest a small one, would, according to those Rules,produce an Effect quite contrary to the Intention of the Architects.

A s to raising the Soffites, or Planchers, on the forepart, ’tis pre-tended to be done, that the Projectures of the Members may thebetter appear, and they hold this to be principally necessary inthree Cafes; namely, when they are to be view’d at a great Di-stance, when the Parts are not situated very high, and when there isnot Liberty to give them their proper Projectures. Nevertheless, wefind, that, in these very Cafes, the contrary has been practis’d inthe Antique. For, in regard of the Aspect, in the Porch of the Pan-theon, where the View may be very distant, and where, on thataccount, the Projectures would seem small, the Soffites, nevertheless,are not rais’d before, and yet, within the Temple, they are rais’d,where, the View being necessarily near, there was no need of it.As to parts situated low, we find the contrary of this Rule, in mostapproved Buildings, where the Soffites are often rais’d in those parts