leso. 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHTIECTS JOURNAL. 



181 



accurately than it had been done before. The distinguishing 

 feature of this order is the bell-shaped capital, ornamented with 

 foliage, a form repeated in endless diversity amongst the 

 Egyptians more than 1000 years before the time of Callimachus; 

 and Josephus tells us that the roof of the Hall of Justice in 

 Solomon's Palace was supported by pillars of the Corinthian order. 

 The bell-shaped capital from its height, and its capability of being 

 highly ornamented, is particularly suitable to an order intended to 

 surpass .all others in richness and lightness of effect, and the 

 difference between the Egyptian lotus flower capital and the 

 Greek Corinthian, is no more than would result from its adapta- 

 tion by a people of taste and genius. 



The following proportions are laid down by Vitruvius for the 

 Corinthian capital: — "The height including the abacus is equal to 

 the lower diameter of the columns, and the diagonal line, drawn 

 from the opposite angles of the abacus, is twice the height of the 

 capital. All the fronts of the abacus are of ecjual extent, and are 

 made concave, the central point in each front receding ^th part of 

 the extent comprehended between the angles. The diameter of 

 the capital at its base is the same as that of the columns below the 

 astragal and apothesis. The depth of the abacus is |th part of the 

 whole height of the capital, the remainder is equally divided into 

 three parts, one of which is occupied by the lower leaf, the second 

 is given to the middle leaf, and an equal space remains for the 

 cauliculi, whence those leaves shoot which projecting forwards 

 appear to support the volutes. The volutes spring from the 

 leaves of the cauliculi, and extend to the angles of the abacus: the 

 lesser helices are carved in the middle of the capital below the 

 flowers in the abacus, and are made as large as the height of it wiU 

 admit." 



How little these rules are applicable to the generality of Greek 

 Corinthian capitals may be seen by referring to the two most 

 perfect examples now remaining — the capital of the Choragic 

 monument of Lysicrates, and that of the Tower of the Winds, both 

 in Athens.* If the rule always held good that the simple precedes 

 the elaborate, we should ascribe to the latter the earliest date; but 

 that is not the fact. The most ancient known example of Greek 

 Corinthian is a column in the interior of the Temple of Apollo 

 Didymaeus, built by Pfeonius, 479 B.C. The Choragic monument 

 of Lysicrates was not erected till the year 355 b.c. In this capital 

 the lowest row consists of plain water leaves; then follows a row of 

 acanthus, with flowers between the leaves; above these are the 

 cauliculi with large bold volutes, supporting the abacus. One 

 great singularity in these columns is that the flutings of the shafts 

 terminate above in leaves. It has been supposed that the vacancy 

 left between the shafts and the capital was originally occupied by a 

 metal astragal. The Tower of the Winds at Athens, dates 139 

 B.C., but the beautiful curve of the bending water leaves, and the 

 exquisite forms of the acanthus, mark this capital as a work of pure 

 Greek art. A similar capital was found among the ruins of the 

 Boeotian Thebes, and another in the island of Milo has two rows of 

 acanthus below the water leaves. 



The Temple of Jupiter Olympius at Athens is generally cited 

 as an example of the Greek Corinthian in its most perfect form, 

 difl^ering but slightly from the rules of Vitruvius; but it is doubtful 

 whether either this temple, or that of Jackly, near Alylasa, can be 

 said to be purely Greek. The Greeks never applied the Corinthian 

 order to the exterior of sacred buildings, but confined it strictly to 

 structures of a light and ornamental character, and to interior 

 decoration. There are instances where the Ionic order has been 

 employed in the interior of Doric temples, of one Corinthian 

 column being placed at the end of the cella, as if to continue 

 the gradation: this was the case in the Temple of Apollo Didymjsus, 

 and in that of Apollo Epicurius at Bassje. 



Though the Temple of Jupiter Olympius was originally com- 

 menced by Pisistratus, and for a time continued by his sons, it 

 was left a mere foundation until the time of .\ntiochus Epiphanes, 

 4-00 years afterwards. We have no proof that it was originally 

 intended by Pisistratus to be of the Corinthian order, nor is it 

 likely that he should in that age have so far violated the feelings 

 and customs of the Greeks, as to have dedicated that light and 

 festive order to the supreme divinity; besides, Pisistratus died in 

 the year 527 b.c, and Callimachus, who at any rate is allow ed to 

 have perfected the Corinthian, and given it those proportions so 

 justly admired, lived at the end of the Peloponnesian war, which 

 terminated 404 b.c: so that it is difficult to believe that tlie 

 capitals of these columns were designed more than a century 

 previous to its existence, particularly when we compare them with 



* See Stuart aod Berell. 



those of the C:horagic monument. ^Vhen Antiochus Epiphanes 

 undertook the construction of this magnificent edifice, he employed 

 a Roman of the name of Cossutius, the first Italian architect on 

 record: it was still however left unfinished, and was partly 

 destroyed by Scylla, and at last restored and completed by the 

 Emperor Hadrian, 700 years after its first foundation. 



The Temple at Jackly is open to the same objection, being also 

 of the time of Roman domination, when Roman taste had already 

 begun to prevail over the pure and severe style of the Greeks. 

 The Corinthian order is suscejitibleof great diversity — the shaft may 

 either be plain or fluted; the .\tticbase is usually employed. The 

 upper torus is sometimes doubled, as in several examples in Asia 

 .Minor; the tori are generally enriched with the guilloche or other 

 ornament. The Corinthian entablature has nearly the same pro- 

 portions as the Ionic, and, like this order, the frieze may either he 

 jilain or elaborately adorned. The distinguishing feature of the 

 Corinthian cornice is the modillion; but from the before-mentioned 

 scarcity of examples of this order in Greece, it will be described 

 more at length in treating of the architecture of Rome. 



I have now endeavoured to sketch the portraits of the "Three 

 Orders," as they were practised in Greece; in my next lecture I 

 propose to take a survey of Athens, as a type of an ancient Greek 

 city, and as the principal school of art. I shall then proceed to 

 describe the temples, theatres, and other principal edifices of 

 Greece, showing the manner in which the orders were applied. 



LIST OF AUTHORITIES. 



Vitruvius.— Antiquities of Athens, Sluart and Revstt. — Antiquities of Ionia, Dilettanti 

 Society.— Anticjiiities of M.igiia Giaicia. Willtins.— An Inquiry into llie Piincijilcs of 

 Beaulv.LoM Aberdeen.— Ku'^vclopEeilia Methodiqtie, G, deQuincy. — Arthitettura Ant ca, 

 Canina.— Tour in Greece. Dr. Wordsnortli.— Travels in Greece, Clarke,— Travils m 

 Greece, Chandler.- Hialory ol Greece, Grote. 



REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS 



APPOINTED 



TO INQUIRE INTO THE APPLICATION OF IRON 

 TO RAILWAY STRUCTURES. 



(Continued from page 116.) 



We owe some apology to our readers for delay in noticing the 

 admirable series of experiments instituted by the " Iron Commis- 

 sion," to illustrate the effects of loads travelling along girders. 

 The experiments may be divided into two classes— those performed 

 at Portsmouth by Captain Jamks and Lieutenant Galton, and 

 those performed subsequently and independently by Professor 

 Willis at Cambridge. 



In both sets of experiments the principal characteristics were the 

 rapid transit of loaded carriages over horizontal bars, and the 

 method of producing the velocity of transit by causing the carriages 

 previously to descend an inclined plane by the accelerating force 

 of gravity. The loaded carriages ran on a railway on the inclined 

 plane, and the oblique descending motion was converted gradually 

 into a horizontal one by connecting the inclined and borizoiittil 

 portions of the railway by curved rails, which avoided the abrtipt- 

 ness of transition from oiie straight line of rail to another. 



The motion of the carriage, then, previously to its reaching the 

 beam to be deflected, is horizontal, and therefore comes on the beam 

 under circumstances precisely analogous to those under which a 

 railway train in practice passes over a bridge. And yet the absurd 

 speculations which have been hazarded (m this point ! ^V'e have 

 heard— but sincerely trust that our information is incorrect— of 

 quasi-philosophers undertaking to gravely, even publicly, criticise 

 the method of exjierimciit on this ground — that previously to 

 coming on the beam the experimental carriage had acquireil, by its 

 motion on the incline, a downward tendency or momentum, uhirli 

 might have been the real cause of the increase of defection of the 

 girder .' .' ■ , i 



There is something almost ludicrous, if it were not very pitiable, 

 in the fact that Professor AVillis has had to defend himself against 

 such cavillers as these — men, too, possessing some name and autho- 

 rity. What can be said to clear up such a hopeless confusion of 

 ideas ? It would be idle to answer, that after the motion ot the 

 carriage has become horizontal, it is perfectly unaffeetetl by aiiy 

 motion which it had a minute or a twelvemonth previously. \\ e 

 had, on commencing this paper, some idea of endeavouring to 

 arn-ue the point seriousl)-, but further reflection shows the hope- 

 lessness of the attempt. All that can lie done is to lament the 

 prevalent ignorance of sound dynamical principles uhich such i 



