Part Ii. five Kinds of Columns.

Proportions are very often different, and, on the contrary, they arealike in different Aspects: It remains to shew, that in those Cases,where a Change of Proportions is allowable, it is not founded onthe Optics, nor upon any Effect that the Distance, or the Situationof the Members of Architecture, can produce.

The first Cafe, in which, I think, the Proportions may bechang’d,js when we would not give much Projecture to a Cornice, an Ar-chitrave, or a Pedestal: for then, the Faces may be made leaningback, to regain, by so doing, what we give to the Projectures:and’t is certain, that here, Optics have nothing to do 3 because theProjectures have really their due Magnitude; and that their is noIntention of making them appear otherwise than they truly are.What is to be obferv’d in the Practice of this, is* that it ought notto be put in execution, but in Places that are concave, as on theInside of Domes or Lanterns, in the Bands, or Architraves ofArches, Door-cases, Window, and Pannel Mouldings 3 and, gene-rally, in those Dispositions, where, no Angle, made at the Return,may shew the Profile of the Moulding 3 in which, these Inclina-tions of the Faces, have a very ill Effect. There are Examples of. these Faces leaning backwards, made with good Success within thePantheon, in the Architrave of the Arches that are over the Entrance,and over the middle Chappel: but this is not practis’d in the Ar-chitrave of the Attic , where the Faces are distinguished only by Mar-bles of different Colours, without making any Projecture one be-yond the other: which may, probably, be one of the Reasons thereare, to think, this Attic was not made by the fame Architect asbuilt the rest of the Temple.

Another Cafe is when one would set a Colofs of a Figure ina very high Place 5 for then, we may make it much larger thanthe other Figures that are below it: but ’tis evident, this is notdone for any Reason of the Optics, because the Intention is, thatthe Figure should appear a Colossus. And T is to be obferv’d insuch Cafe, that this Statue be set upon something that bears a Pro-portion to its Bigness, it not being proper to put it, for Example,upon a second and third Order, which being necessarily less thanthe first, ought not to bear Statues disproportionate to it, but such.as are less than those of the first Order. So that it must be contrivedin such manner, that there may appear to be a Recess of the Work,comprehending several Orders, or, at least, bearing Proportion tothe Colossal Statue. This is observ’d in the Triumphal Arch of theFauxbourg of S. Anthony , where the Colossal Statue, of the King, isset above, upon the Massive of the Building 3 against which, thereis an Order, quite round about, that rises not above half the Heightof this massive Part 3 for the massive serves for a Pedestal to the

G g great