314 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY 



question seems to me to be the only one that leads to even measurably 

 certain conclusions. 



My plan is first to state the outlines of the theory of the column 

 and the pier, and then to attempt to apply that theory to the elucida- 

 tion of the forms in question. 



§ 2. Theoretical Origin of the Column and Pier as Architectural 



Members. 



A Column, as I shall use the term, is a free, vertical architectural 

 support or prop, whose transverse section is either a circle, a modi- 

 fied circle, or several circles grouped together. It is free in that 

 it is unconnected with the building to which it belongs, except by its 

 mechanical bearings, namely, its two ends. This separates it from the 

 pilaster and the vertical moulding. Its vertically distinguishes it from 

 the flying buttress and rafter. As a support for the entablature and 

 roof, it is distinct from all tower, obelisk, and mast forms, the column 

 being always more or less subservient in the conformation of its sum- 

 mit, and of the lines and decorations of its parts, to the superposed 

 structure, while the spire or obelisk is entirely self-determined. The 

 section of a column is a simple, modified, or compound circle; as, 

 for example, simple in Tuscan, modified — by flutes — in Doric and 

 Corinthian, compound in some Gothic columns. This characteristic 

 keeps it apart from the pier. 



A Pier is a support, free and vertical like a column, but one 

 whose transverse section is a simple, modified, or compound rectangle. 

 A square pier, so long as it has neither base nor cap-stone, is simply 

 a wall whose length equals its thickness. Regarded in this light, 

 therefore, in addition to its supporting intent, it has an object entirely 

 foreign to a column, namely, the limitation of a space. The rectan- 

 gular form, however, may be reached from a slightly different starting- 

 point. In rocky excavations it is necessary to leave pillars at inter- 

 vals to prevent the collapse of the roof. These pillars are ordinarily 

 quite carelessly shaped, but the first step toward an architectural form 

 is the reduction of their rough masses to plane-bounded piers. 



At all events, the pier and the column are of widely different origin. 

 While the former is to be regarded as the descendant either of a wall 

 or of an underground pillar, the latter must in the last analysis be 

 traced to the wooden prop of a primitive hut. The pier, in short, is of 

 mineral, the column of vegetable origin. 



The pier, it is true, may receive a cap-stone and base, its angles 



