C'hap. I. ARCADES ABOVE ARCADES.

897
Fig. 919.
proportions would have been somewliat more pleasing. It is
true that a trifling irregularity would liave been introduced
into the triglyphs of the upper order, or rather the metopae
between them; but that might have been easily provided against
by a very trifling alteration in the height of the frieze itself
This fault of making the voids too lar.ije pervades Chambers's
examples, and but that we might have been thought too pre-
suming we should have slightly altered the proportions, little
being requisite to bring them under the laws which we have
thought to be founded on reason and analogy. We have indeed
throughout this work refrained from giving other than approved
examples, preferring to confine ourselves to observations on
them when we have not considered them faultless.
2659. In the figure the clear width of the lower arcade is
7,
and its height 141 modules. The width of each pier is 1
module. Of the upper arcade the width is 9;\, and the height
18-233 modules. The width of the piers is I ^ module each.
The height of the plinth of the lower order is 11 module, that
of the column, including base and capital, 141 modules, the
entablature 3.^. The height of the pedestal of the upper order
is 3 "733 modules, of the column with its base and capital
16,
and of the entablature 3-733 modules. In the proportions
between the voids and solids above taken the balustrade is not
considered as a solid, because, in fact, it is nothing more than
a railing for the protection of those using the upper story.
As we have expressed our desire to give the examples of others
rather than our own, we feel bound to recommend the student
to set up the diagram in question, with the simple alteration of reducing the solids
nearly to an equality with the voids, which may be done with sufficient accuracy by as-
signing to the lower arcade a module less in width than Chambers has done
; and we
venture to say that he will be surprised at the difference, as regards grace and elegance,
which will result from the experiment. It is to be understood that no change is proposed
in the other dimensions of the ordonnance, the width of piers, orders, entablatures, all re-
maining untouched.
2660. In
fig.
920. we give another example from Chambers, which, in our opinion,
requires a rectification to bring it into proper form. Herein the lonip is used above
the Doric arcade, and the voids to the solids are as 3-33
to 2-98, being much more
than equal to them. In this, as in
the former example, we should have
preferred a greater equality between
the solids and voids, though in that
under consideration there is a nearer
approximation to it.
2661. In the figure the clear width
of the lower arch is 81, and its height
1
6|
modules ; the width of each pier
is 1 module. Of the upper arcade
the width is IQl,
and the height 201
modules. The width of the piers is
1
\
module each. The height of the
plinth of the lower order is l\ module
that of the column, including the base
and capital, ]
6\ modules, and of the
ental)lature 4 modules. The height
of the pedestal of the upper order 4
modules, of the column, including
base and capital, 18 modules, and of
the entablature
4, and of the balus-
trade above it 31.
2662. The dimensions of the Ionic
and Corinthian arcades in
fig.
921.
are as follow :
Clear width of
lower arch
9 modules, its height 1
8^
modules. The width of each pier is
1 module. Of the upper arcade the
width of an arch 1.53 modules, and its
height 23 modules. The width of