[ 796 ] 
fide the entrance. This meafures io feet inches 
(9), equal to 11134,9; which, divided by n|, 
gives 968-? for the Roman foot. 
This difagreement between the meafures in the 
front, cannot be reconciled by any probable divifors ; 
therefore it muft be owing to an error in workman- 
fhip. And if the difiance between the centers of the 
middle columns were but a little more than { of a 
London inch greater, both that, and the whole extent 
of the front, would anfwer to the fame meafure of 
the foot with the fides. Now, as the middle inter- 
columniation was intended to be greater than the reft, 
the workman might be lefs exad in laying out the 
front, than the fides, where they were all to be equal ; 
for the front intercolumniations next the angles being 
kept equal to thofe on the fides, the fymmetry cf the 
building would be preferved, and the whole error fall 
on the middle intercolumniation, where it could not 
be difcovered. 
Or if, on the other hand, we fuppofe the meafure 
of the extent in front to have been correct, and the 
error to have lain in the fides, the workman muft ftill 
have made the intercolumniations on the fides equal 
to each other, and thofe in the front next the angles, 
equal to them : and, in this cafe, 970 would be the 
true meafure of the foot, inftead of 971. 
Therefore, I think, it cannot be doubted, that one 
or the other of them was the meafure by which this 
building was conftrudfed. 
(9) Defgodetz has figured this 10 feet 5 A inches; which will 
be found to be a miftake, by comparing the correfpondent num- 
bers, and by his meafure of this interval in modules. 
The 
