[ 8 °5 ] 
The width of the door-cafe, between the jambs, 
has been fuppofed, by Picard, De la Hire, Eifenfch- 
mid, and others, to have been a meafure of whole 
feet ; for this reafon, becaufe they thought it an ar- 
bitrary one, and therefore not likely to contain a 
fraction (i). But in this, I think, they were mis- 
taken ; for it appears to have been determined by the 
width of the paftage within, of which it takes up 
juft three fourths. The proportion is too Simple, 
and too exactly executed, to be accidental ; and it is 
highly improbable, that the width of this palTage, 
which is a principal part of the plan of the infide, 
Should be determined by that of the door-cafe. 
The width of the paftage, is 24 feet j |4 inches, == 
26098,6 ; that of the door-way, next the paftage, is 
18 feet 4-$- inches, = ip6io 5 next the portico, 1 8 feet 
4-| inches, = 15)561,95 none of which will give a 
meafure of the foot, anfwering to the reft of the 
building, by whole divifors. The width of the door- 
way next the portico (which has been fuppofed to be 
juft 20 Roman feet), divided by 20, gives 5)78. But 
the diameters of the temple (taking either the greateft 
or the leaft, inftead of a mean), will not anfwer to a 
foot of this meafure, by probable divifors. 
The principal meafures in the portico are, its ex- 
tent in front and depth, and the Shafts of the columns. 
(1) Mr. Greaves fays, this door-cafe is one entire marble ftone. 
See p. 348. and p. 494 * And Ficoroni (a late writer), in his 
Veftigia di Roma antica, p. 132. fpeaking of this door-cafe, fays, 
** Efiendo amendue i lati, col di fopra, e il di fotto di un folo pezzo 
di marmo.” But Defgodetz, p. 18. fays, that each fide of the ar- 
chitrave confifts of two ftones, and the top, of one j and corrects 
Serlio, for faying the whole was of one piece. 
5L 2 The 
