Lines in the Parthenon. Ih the Parthenon, considered as one the best examples of architecture of all time, late discoveries and more exact measurements have developed the fact that there is prob ably not an exactly straight line in the entire structure. The most careful study was given to every part of this beautiful building, from every possible point of observation. In the front, for instance, the stylobate upon which the columns rest is slightly higher at the center than at each end, in order to prevent any appearance of dropping at this point as would have been inevitable if it were laid out on a per fectly straight line; the lines of the entablature were in turn slightly raised at the center so that it would not appear to sag; the highest point, again, is nbt exactly in the center, but to one side, where the building would be seen by anyone approaching from the Propylæa, the entrance to the Acropolis. The columns of the colonnade around the building are all slightly out of the perpendicular; they incline or lean back to ward the center, so that the axes, if prolonged to a long distance above the building, would all finally meet at one vanishing point. This is true in all its meanings. Not only does the entire colonnade along the side, for instance, lean back in plane toward the parallel center line of the building along the ridge of the roof, but the columns, as they approach the two ends of the building, lean back toward the center line of the respective elevations. This is true on all four sides of the building, in order to have the sloping lines of the columns correctly intersect at each angle. By referring to the cuts this will be made more clear. Fig. 35 shows two perpendicular sections through the colonnade, with the column placed beyond the face of the enclosing wall of the building. The column at the left is shown with its axis perpendicular and at right angles to a horizontal line. This is the way the Greeks did not use the column. At the right is shown a column employed in their customary manner. Here the dotted line dropped from the inside of the architrave of the crowning entablature discloses the fact that the axis of the column is sloping back at the top toward the enclosing interior wall of the building; while the face of the frieze and entablature above also follows, though more slightly, this same gradual slope. In this example the taper of the column is exaggerated in order to emphasize the theory of its arrangement.
Fig. 36 is a plan of the frieze of the Greek Doric Order, showing the columns placed beneath it under every alternate triglyph. This drawing indicates the plans of the columns at the neck and base in relation to each other, and discloses the fact that their centers, while on a perpendicular line in front elevation, are not directly over each other in plan, the center of the column at the neck being placed behind the center at the base in order to produce the effect shown at the right in Fig. 35. At the corner, the center of the column at the neck is nec essarily slanted in on each elevation, as is shown on this plan. This will indicate the first stage of the development of this theoretical system, which is shown more clearly in Fig. 37, where the plan of the six-columned Greek Doric porch illustrates the complete working out of this theory. Here we find that each column not only leans back from the face of the building, but also that it is shown inclined toward the center point as well, thus equalizing this.gradu
al inclination of the columns from the one at the corner to the cen ter of any facade of the building, where, if a column were placed, it would be directly perpendicular in elevation while its neck would still incline back from the face of the building. The almost intangible variation of these columns from the perpendicular was made in'order that they would not appear to spread outward at the top, and that at the same time the building would present, in its pyramidal form, a more solid and enduring aspect.
Refinement in Detail. We have already marked that with the progress of architecture the column takes portions more elegant, and the entablature diminishes in height. We shall also find that at the same time the echinus of the capital--flattened in the old temples and compressed under the weight of the entablature—is straightened and supports with more firmness the abacus. The mouldings become less brutal; the column at the angle receives a diameter a little larger than belongs to the other columns; the rec tangular shape which has been taken as the form of the edifice becomes delicately pyramidal, until we arrive at such admirable ex examples as the Temple of fgina, the Propylæa, the Theseum, and the Parthenon. • The Greek Doric Capital. The echinus moulding is considered as the most distinctive of all the sections invented by the Greeks; and, as used in the Doric capital, it received a character that does not pertain to it when used in any other position. In the earlier examples its outlines will be found more rounding in section than in the later ones where it attains to a beautifully studied eccentric curve, neither flat enough to be hard, nor full enough to be weak in effect, until in the Parthenon and Tholos of Epidauros it is refined to an almost straight line. The compared sections of capitals from Corinth, Ptestum, the Temple of Concord at Agrigentum, and the Parthenon at Athens, (shown in Fig. 38), illustrate this progress. The various sections of this cap moulding, from the early, fuller, rounder examples where it spreads out far beyond the shaft, along with the different ways of expressing the variously termed annulets or fillets that separate this moulding from the fluted necking below, show how carefully the Greek sculptors experimented in order to obtain just the effect that they desired. In the later periods of Greek architecture the outline of this echinus moulding is as simple, delicate, and beauti ful as any detail that the Greeks have made; and in the best examples it may be considered typical of the refinement and proportions of their architecture. The character of this section,showing the echinus mould ing itself in proportion to the abacus, the character of the fillets that divide it from the fluted necking, and the various sections of the recesses taking the place of an astragal that separate it from the shaft, are shown more fully in Figs. 39, 40, 41, 42, 43 and 44. These same illustrations will indicate the relations of the column diameter at the neck and base. But, while interesting in trac ing the development of t h e column, none of the examples are so perfect or so well worthy of reproduction as that used in the Parthenon, shown at a larger size in Plate XXXVII.