The history of the column among the Greeks reaches back to pre-Homeric days, for it ap pears in the Myeenwan and Aehfean royal pal aces and tombs in Crete, Mycelia!, Tiryns, and elsewhere. No classic orders yet exist, and the shafts, strangely enough, are larger at the neck than at the base. In the seventh century B.C. the two great columnar orders, Doric and Ionic, have developed all important features and reign—the one in Sicily, Magna Gracia, and most of the Greek mainland, the other in Asia Minor and some of the islands, passing then to Attica and other semi-Ionic part::: of G reece. These orders are characterized by their special entabla ture (q. v.). as well as column. The Hellenic appreciation of ;esthetic proportions and of ideal types is shown in the early attempt of architects to establish canons for each of these orders. The most startling novelty in the Hellenic use of the column was that it was in the main for external, instead of internal, effect. In the development of Greek architecture there was a continually increasing tendency in favor of the Ionic style. The attempt to give a history of these two orders on the basis of an evolution of form has proved unsatisfaetory, except in Such general facts that Doric gradually lose much of their orig inal heaviness. The Doric column had no sep arate base, but the entire row rose from a common stepped base. The shaft tapered slightly upward, and the straight outline was mitigated by an outward curve or entasis, most pronounced below the centre: it was fluted with from 16 to 20 channels, meeting in sharp edges, or arrises, and was joined to the capital by a glooved necking. The capital itself consists of a circular cushion, or cehinus, surmounted by a square plinth. or abacus, on which the entabla ture rests. The heavy proportions of early Doric gave the columns a height of only four to five diameters and an intereolutnniation of hardly more than a single diameter, but the height was gradually increased until it reached six to seven diameters rind the intercolumniation increased— a change corresponding to a lightening of the entablature. The Doric column usually had a thin coat of stneco, painted a delicate buff. The Ionic column was far more graceful amid deco rative. Its slenderness allowed of far less -tapering and entasis of the shaft, which rested on a base. This base at first varied in type and was especially rich in Asia Minor before taking the normal Attic form which remained the typi cal base even in post-classic times. The height of the column was from eight to ten times its diameter; its shaft had 24 deep flutings, sepa rated by narrow fillets. The capital consisted of spiral connected volutes, between which was a cyma, or ovolo, with pearl beading, and it was connected with the architrave by a thin, deco rated plinth. Carving and color contribute to form the decoration, In Greek times the Corin thian style hardly rose to the dignity of an order, its only important change from the Ionic being in the different capital. It is interesting to notice that the Greeks merely blocked out their columns before erecting them, and only after the building was fully constructed were the channels, moldings, and ornaments cut. When marble came into use, in the fifth century, the surface was no longer stuccoed.
The Romans abandoned, in the third century B.C., the wooden columns with terra-cotta sheath ing of the Etruscans for the solid columns of the Greeks, but introduced several variations. The principal of these variations were the fre quent use of unchanneled and monolithic shafts of the brilliantly colored marbles, like the Nn midian, porphyry, or serpentine; the general use of the Corinthian. instead of the two simpler capitals, and the development of a real Corin thian order; the modification of the Doric into the so-called 'Tuscan' style; the invention of the Composite. capital, of high pedestals, of engaged
columns, and of a rich system of sculptured decoration. The column was now, for the first time, combined with the arch, as well as with the architrave. Thus the Romans increased the uses, the size, the materials, and the types of columns, though losing much of the refinement' of form and proportions of Greek art. At the same time, especially in their civil public build ings, the Romans substituted heavy piers—often with engaged columns—for the columns them selves, on account of the use of vaulting, which could not be supported by slender shafts. It was reserved for Early Christian architecture to develop the use of the column with the arch in interiors, especially in the basilicas (q.v.) and other churches, and in baptisteries. No new forms were invented in the West, where there was a gradual decline in the quality of columnar architecture; but in the East the Byzantine and other schools added to the old types of cap itals many new ones, such as basket and foliated capitals, and commenced the fashion of wall col onnettes, which was so popular in the Roman esque and Gothic styles, to the great enrichment of wall surfaces. The plundering and destruc tion of ancient buildings, for the sake of using their materials in new constructions, helped at the same time to Lee]) alive the knowledge of the old orders, especially in the West. The reign of the column was henceforth sharply contested by the pier, which became the principal construc tive support in Byzantine art. The use of the two forms—pier and column—was about equally balanced in Italy and Germany: the pier was more popular in France and England. For a short time the Gothic style adopted the columns for its main supports, hut substituted finally the grouped pier as stronger and more in con structive and formal harmony with the molded ribbings of arch and vault. The column con tinued to reign, however, in nearly all other cases. There were vo longer any orders or re ceived canons of proportion. All natural forms of foliage and flowers, all known geometric and formal patterns were used in the capitals: the Ionic base, while used as the norm, was infinitely varied: the shafts were hardly ever channeled; sometimes they were monoliths, sometimes built up. Only in such Italian provinces as Rome and Tuscany did much of the old classic design sur vive. Certain variations in the shafts. such as twisted, spiral, knotted, foliated shafts, of which glimpses had been seen in the Roman and Byzan tine periods, became common in the :Middle Ages, and appear especially in subordinate structures, such as cloisters (q. v.).
The originators of the Renaissance style vacil lated for a while. Brunelleschi, its founder, used the column in his two principal churches, but though it was retained in palace courts and cloisters, it was almost immediately and finally displaced by the pier—a heavier pier than the Gothic. The column became largely a decorative feature, and was used freely. engaged in piers and walls. The Nen-Classic style employed the column on a grand scale in facades resembling the Pantheon, on exteriors copied from Greek peripteral temples, and in colonnades resembling the old basilicas. In modern architecture the column plays but a very subordinate role, either constructive or decorative. Consult, in general: Ruskin, Stones of Venice, vol. i. (London, 7S53) ; Longfellow, The Column and the Arch (New York, 1899) ; Gwilt, Eneyelopcvdia of Architecture (London, 1899). For the classic orders, see Vitruvins, De Architect Libri (translated by Gwilt, London, 1826) ; Biitticher, Die Techtonik der Hellene» (Berlin, 1874-81) ; Bfilihnann, Die Soulenordnungen (Stuttgart, 1893). For the Romanesque and Gothic column, see Dehio and Von Bezold, Die kirehlirhe Ban kunst des Abendbandes (Stuttgart, 1887-94).