JOINERY.
The term door is sometimes applied to the gates of locks or sluices.
DoOlZWAY, the entrance or aperture in which the door is hung. Doorways are usually rectangular in shape, but sometimes arched. In the early styles previous to the intro duction of the arch, all apertures consisted by necessity of an horizontal lintel supported by two vertical jambs, although not 'infequently the jambs inclined converging upwards. Doorways were enriched in a variety of ways, often by a platband running round the jambs and lintel, and sometimes by an entablature above the lintel. An elaborate work upon the subject has been published by Professor Donaldson.
Soon after the introduction of the arch, that form was applied to doorways, the form of the arch, whether semi circular, pointed, or otherwise, being determined by the date and style of the building. Of' the first form, the Romanesque style atll,rds us sonic very beautiful specimens ; witness that of the Temple Church, London, which is a very fine example, and consists of a compound arch, that is to say, a series of concentric and receding arches, each arch with its pier being profusely adorned with pillars and enriched mouldings of all hinds. These doorways seem to have been admired in all ages, fur frequently, when all the rest of a church has been pulled down to make room for one of a more elaborate or more fashionalde style of architecture, the old Romanesque doorway has been preserved, and worked up in the new structure. For exquisite examples of doorways in the pointed styles, we have only to refer to the magnificent western entrances of the Continental cathedrals, and the smaller and less elaborate, though not less beautiful, examples in our own country.
. . a term sometimes applied to the space between the doorway properly so called, and the larger dour archway within which it is placed. This space is frequently ornamented with sculpture, &c.
1)01:1C 01:D Ell, the most ancient Grecian order of archi tecture, was first used in building the temple of Juno at irgos, at the period when Dorus, father of' the Dorians, reigned in the Pcloponnesus ; though, according to Vitruvius, its symmetry and proportions were not fixed till Ion, the nephew of Dorus, and chief of the Ionians, led an Athenian colony into that part of Asia Minor which was afterwards distinguished by his name, and there built a temple, after the 1i:shim of those in the Dorian states, the columns of which were six diameters in height, taking the proportion from the ratio that a man's foot bears to the height of his body.
The Doric is distinguished, in general appearance, from the succeeding orders, by its bold and massy proportions, as well as by its comparative want of ornamentation ; all its parts are bold and prominent, its details few and imposing.
Its origin is stated by Vitruvius to have been derived from the primitive buildings of the Greeks, which were made of timber ; but others derive the style from the stone structures of Egypt, and others from those of Persia and the East. It would be the more natural method to discuss this subject ere proceeding farther, but as the discussion could not be readily understood without some previous acquaintance with the details and general character of the order, it may be as well to turn our attention to these matters first of al].
This order then consists, like the others, of column and entablature, but differs from them in this, that the first men tioned division comprises only two members, the shaft and capital ; the base, which is indispensable in the other orders, being omitted in this, at least in the earlier and purer examples, as practised by the Greeks.' The reason of this omission has been accounted for in various ways by different writers ; Vitruvius will have it, that the base was first intro duced in the Ionic order to represent the sandal or covering of a woman's foot, and that in the Doric, which resembled in some way or other a strong muscular and barefooted man, this member was not appropriate. Some are of opinion that the omission was occasioned by the close proximity of the columns in this order, which would not admit of any excres cence at the base. It is true the intercolumniation is very contracted, and the addition of any base, especially of a square one with its angular corners, would render the passage between the columns extremely narrow and inconvenient ; indeed, even without a base, the space was inconveniently small, and was felt to be so, as we gather from the fact that the intercolumniation of the portico opposite the entrance door was increased in width, evidently to afford readier access to the interior ; notwithstanding, we can scarcely bring ourselves to conclude that this was the reason of the absence of a base. We rather incline to believe that a base had as yet never been thought of, the idea had not yet suggested itself; in Egyptian temples, from which we believe the Doric order to have emanated, the columns were usually devoid of' bases, and it is but reasonable to presume that in their earlier essays, the Greeks aimed at nothing more than a copy, and did not think either of' addition or improvement.