328 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY 



plausibility of the wood-derivation theory. In the Ionic and Corinthian 

 orders the flutes are parted by narrow, convex listels, the remnants of 

 the rounded surface in which the flutes are imagined to be cut. In 

 most of the examples of the older Doric style, the flutes meet in sharp 

 edges, so that it seems hopeless to discover the basal form that the 

 architect had in mind. In this discouraging situation, however, there 

 is usually found a little three-cornered convexity between the tops of 

 the flutes.* If this three-cornered piece consisted of two planes meet- 

 ing in a ridge which was continuous with the edge between the flutes 

 below, the prism would be suggested as the original or fundamental 

 form ; but it is not so composed ; it is a smooth convexity, a segment 

 of the surface of a cylinder, so that, if a tranverse section of the 

 column were made a centimeter below the echinus, it would be a 

 circle, either unbroken or but slightly indented. Further, one of the 

 temples at Paastum shows columns whose flutes terminate a consider- 

 able distance below the echinus, leaving a wide zone at the toil of the 

 shaft to testify to the artist's idea.f Finally, a Doric column was 

 found at Priene with regular listels such as the Ionic and Corinthian 

 columns have.$ The "proto-Doric" forms are without any such marks. 

 No convexities anywhere intervene between the flutes ; the angularity 

 of the prism obtains from top to bottom. The flutes are sometimes 

 omitted, leaving the prism unmodified,§ or, if they are present, at least 

 one side is left unfluted for the reception of hieroglyphics. || 



Again, the column and the pier bear different relations to the adja- 

 cent members, particularly the architrave and abacus. The pier 

 recollects that in theory both it and the architrave belong to the same 

 wall. Of this theoretical wall three reminiscences may remain : first, 

 two short sections, attached to the side-walls, called pilasters ; second, 

 one or more central remnants, — perhaps somewhat modified, — whose 

 length approximates to their thickness, which are the piers themselves; 

 and, third, a strip from the top of the wall engaged with the roof, 

 which may be called by analogy the architrave. The feature which 

 betrays the affinity of these is the identical thickness of the architrave 

 and of the bases, if not of the whole bodies of the pilasters and piers. 



1 i» I m if** ~ 



* See, for example, the Dilettanti Society's "Ionian Antiquities," ii. 6, 13, &c. 

 t See Thomas Major, " Psestum," plates 21 and 22. 

 J Ionian Antiquities, i. 18. Compare iii. 27 and 32. 



§ No unquestioned example at Benihassan ; but a good one from Kamak is 

 photographed by Rouge', " Mission," plate 61. 

 || Lepsius, i. 59; and Fig. 2. 



