Plate 85. Various Ancient Entablatures

Vitruvius writes that the front surfaces of the different parts of the entablature, the architrave, frieze, corona, etc., for optic reasons, should tilt forward about 1-12 of their height.

In addition to the examples of entablatures which we have given in this work, we will add a few which, though not as elaborate, are composed after the same principles. Three of them belong to the interior of the Pantheon (Plate 65), and although they are there placed near together, but serve different purposes, they are similar to one another in the arrangement of their members and in their proportions. The architraves alone are different. The fasciæ of the architrave and the corona seem to have given the architect much thought, and have been the cause of much dispute, as they are both slanting forward and backward. It has been assumed that these slanting surfaces were for the purpose of increasing or decreasing the adjacent projections, but this rule seems inconsistent, inasmuch as on the small Altars or Tabernacles in the Pantheon there is no reason whatever why the corona and the dentil member should overhang, while the architrave recedes. On the cornice of the attic the members slant forward, while the architrave is perpendicular. It must, therefore, have been the taste of the architect and not a general rule of the time that produced this manner of profile, which is, therefore, strictly speaking, not to be recommended. The soffits of the small Altars on the Pantheon are found on Plate 87.

The entablature at the bottom of the plate, is from the doorway under the portico of the Pantheon. The modillions have been omitted, and the other members have been more appropriately ornamented. The profile of the mouldings is highly spirited, and the relation of all, one to another, very good. The filling of the opening consists of two doors and a transom light all of bronze. On Plate 94 is given an example of a similar filling. A diagram of the complete doorway is found on Plate 93. The cornice with consoles near the center of the plate belongs to the exterior of the same building.

The entablature from the Peace Temple, also shown on Plate 85, is not a creditable example. Particularly to be criticised is the absence of the corona.