A R C H I T 
up in England, of the firft profeflional eminence and abi¬ 
lity. Inigo Jones firft enriched this kingdom with palaces 
and noble manlions in the Greek and Roman ftyle, which 
are at this day the admired refidences ot fome of the mod 
diftinguifhed families in different parts of the country. 
Sir Chriftopher Wren fucceeded, and improved upon the 
examples of his predeceffor, until he eclipfed Rome her- 
felf, by the eredlion of that fublime and beautiful flructure, 
St. Paul’s cathedral. Sir Chriftopher brought up his im¬ 
provements in architecture to the opening of the feven- 
teenth century, fmee which time this fcience has made 
fuch aftonifhing progrefs in England, that we may with 
fafety alfert we are not excelled, perhaps not equalled, in 
any part of the univerfe, for the elegance and fplendour 
of our modern buildings. 
The apparent caufe of this fuccefs in our architecture, 
feems to have arilen from what every profelfor of it ihould 
conftantly have in view, namely, a happy combination of 
the ufeful with the ornamental, wherein true proportion, 
regularity, and beauty, are alike confpicuous. To effect 
thfs, however, is fometimes attended with great difficulty; 
nor is every (trudture calculated to admit of thefe united 
perfections. In fuch cafes, the judgment and foreiight of 
the architect nnift be exerted, to decide upon that which 
the nature and deftination of the building requires, to ex- 
prefs its leading or prominent feature. The fafeft method 
is in general to prefer utility to ornament, in proportion as 
the character of the building will admit of it. In palaces, 
and fuch buildings as are capable of a variety of ufeful con¬ 
trivance, regularity ought to be preferred; but in dwelling- 
houfes that are on too fmall a fcale for variety of contri¬ 
vance, regularity ffiould give place to ufefulnefs, fo far at 
lead as the former Hands in direCt oppolition to the latter. 
In contemplating the beauty of vifible objects, we dif- 
cover two kinds: the firft may be termed intrinjic beauty, 
becaufe it is difeovered in a fingle objeCt, without relation 
to another. The fecond may be termed relative beauty, 
being founded on a combination of relative objects. Ar¬ 
chitecture admits of both. There is a fort of beauty or 
harmony in the w hole character of a building, with rela¬ 
tion to its intended occupier. Vitruvius, Palladio, and 
other writers, have been careful to inculcate this doCtrine, 
as abfolutely neceffary to be obferved by a good architect. 
Indeed it is founded on felf-evident principles; for all will 
admit, that the appearance of a palace ought to convey an 
idea of the majefly and grandeur which are peculiar to 
monarchs, fo that a common obferver may pronounce, on 
the firfl view of fuch an edifice, that it is deftined to be 
the habitation of fo dignified a perfonage. Nature herfelf 
is a precedent for this doCtrine. The vaulted canopy of 
the heavens, and all their richly ornamented fpheres, con- 
fiitute a glorious temple, that moll accurately befpeaks the 
character of its divine poffeffor. The like conformity, in 
its humble degree, Ihould appear in thofe inferior ftruc- 
tures ereCted by art, for the accommodation of the various 
claffes of human fociety. Regard is therefore to be paid 
to the dignity, rank, or profeffion, of the intended occu¬ 
pier; but, if a building is deftined to fome particular and 
public profeffion, then we (liould regard the public ufe for 
which it is intended, without confining our ideas to the 
quality of any individual proprietor. 
It is from relative beauty, that the proportions of a door 
are determined by the ufe to which it is deftined. The 
door of a dwelling-houfe, which ought to correfpond to the 
human fize, is confined to feven or eight feet in height, 
and three or four in breadth. Thofe proportions affigned 
to a liable or coach-houfe are different, for different rea- 
fons. The door of a church ought to be wide, to afford 
an eafy paffage to a multitude ; and its height ffiould there¬ 
fore be in proportion, that its appearance may pleafe the 
eye. The fize of windows ought always to be in propor¬ 
tion to the dimenfions of the room they are intended to il¬ 
luminate ; for if the apertures, or openings, be not large 
enough to convey light in an equal diftribution to every 
part of the room, the whole will have a deformed appear. 
E C T U R E. 9$ 
ance. Nothing can be more di(agreeable, than to fee a 
profufion and glare of light irt'one part of a room, whilft 
the other is under a ftrong (hade ; fuch contrary effeCts al¬ 
ways prove difadvantageous to the appearance of furniture 
and other ornaments common to good apartments. Steps or 
Hairs Ihould likewife receive a fuitable proportion, and be 
accommodated to the human figure, without relation to 
the magnitude of any other part of the building; and there¬ 
fore in fmall and in larger houfes they ffiould rife alike, 
becaufe men are nearly alike in ftature. The proportions 
ot rooms are either intrinfic or relative, though in moil 
cafes both are included. The intrinfic proportion of a room 
is its length, breadth, and height; which being properly 
adjufled, weqironounce it of a beautiful proportion, with¬ 
out regard to any other part of the building. But the re¬ 
lative beauty of proportion is as the whole area of the room 
is to the magnitude of the houl’e of w hich it conflitutes a 
part. A room may be well proportioned as to itfelf, but 
may, at the fame time, be either too large or too fmall for 
the whole edifice. In a lumptuous building, the capital 
rooms ought to be large, otlierwife they will not be pro¬ 
portioned to the fize of the whole ; and for the fame rea- 
fon a very large room is improper in a fmall houfe ; yet 
every houfe ought to have both large and fmall rooms, in 
proportion to itfelf. Yet, in things thus related, the mind 
requires not a precife or fingle proportion, rejedfing all 
others ; on the contrary, different proportions are fome¬ 
times equally agreeable to view. It is only when a pro¬ 
portion becomes loofe and diftant, that the agreeablenels 
abates, and at lad vaniflies. With regard to the propor¬ 
tion the height of a room ffiould bear to the length and 
breadth, it nnift be rather uncertain in fome cafes, arifing 
from that deception to which the eye is fubjedt when its 
height exceeds 16 or 17 feet; yet, if a proper optical al¬ 
lowance be made, we do not think the attainment of a beau¬ 
tiful proportion fo hazardous or arbitrary a talk as fome 
architects would infinuate. A room 48 feet in length, 
and 24 in breadth and height, is well proportioned ; but 
it is well known, that, were we to reduce thofe to 12 and 
24, a room would approach too near the appearance of a 
gallery. Yet it is evident that, if the proportion be fo ad- 
jufled as to be in the medium between thefe two, a room 
cannot produce a bad eftedl as to its fize. I'or inflance, 
if the height and breadth be 18 feet each, and the length 
3 6 feet, this proportion of a room is by architects termed 
harmonic, or agreeable to the eye, anfwering to diapente, 
one of the chords in niufic, which includes the interval 
from 1 to 5, and is agreeable to the ear. 
Upon this principle there are feven proportions affigned 
to rooms, which are termed harmonies or agreeables. The 
cube, cube and half, double cube, the fubduple of 4, 3, 
and 2: ditto of 5, 4, and 3 : ditto of 6, 4, and 3 : and 
laftly, of 3, 2, and 1. Upon this fcale, if the height of 
the room be 18 feet, as before, it is of the cube form 
when its width and length are the fame, or more properly 
when the floor, cieling, and fide-walls, are all of one di- 
raenfion. The fecond, or cube and half proportion, will 
be 27 feet long and 18 broad ; the third, or double cube 
proportion, 36 feet by 18 broad; the fubduple of 4, 3, 
and 2, produce 36 feet in length and 27 in breadth; ditto 
of 3, 4, and 3, produce 30 feet by 24 broad; ditto of 6, 
4, and 3, produce 36 by 24 broad ; ditto of 3, 2, and r, 
produce 54 by 36 broad. To find the produce of thefe 
fubduples proceed thus : in every cafe divide the given 
height of the room by the fmalleft numbers, 3, 2, or x, 
as may be required. Again, multiply ijie quotient by the 
middle numbers 4, 3, or 2, and the produce will be the 
width of the room. Laftly, multiply the (aid quotient by 
the larged numbers 4, 5, 6, or 3, and the produce will 
give the length of the room of the firft fub-duplicate, 4, 
3, and 2. Example : Divif. Divid. Quotient. 
2 ) 18 ( 9 
3 middle number mult, 
quotient 9 mult, by the larged — 
number 4 27 ft. width of the room, 
36 ft. length of the room. If 
