Plate 53. Examples of the Corinthian Order

Until the age of Pericles, the Grecians knew only two different styles of architecture, the characteristic variations of which were the column orders, namely, the sturdy earnest Doric and the slender graceful Ionic, both of which had reached the fullest development. The increasing admiration for the beautiful, by the art-loving people, as also the natural strivings of the artists to constantly surpass the work done before, naturally led to new forms which at first appeared on a column capital, of slender form and rich decoration, other than the Ionic.

According to Vitruvius the capital of a new third order originated with the Greeks in the following manner: Over a grave at Corinth was placed a high basket with a spreading rim, which was filled with all sorts of toys having belonged to one passed away, and in order that the contents of the basket might be better protected it was covered with a rectangular slab. By accident this basket was placed on the root of an acanthus plant, which grew and encircled the basket with its leaves, stems and flowers, and bent itself under the cover in such a charming manner that the sculptor Callimachos, struck with its beauty, took therefrom the idea of a new column capital and shortly thereafter carried out entire columns with similar capitals at Corinth, from which this new order took the name Corinthian. The other parts of the column, as also the cornice, were borrowed from the Ionic order of the Greeks; these parts, however, first received a character of their own from the Romans, and the entire order took on the greatest richness which, though, inclined to the extravagant.

In treating of the Corinthian order we had not so large a selection of Greek examples as was the case with the Doric and Ionic. Some fragments of columns have been preserved which are given on Plates 58 and 59, but the original entablatures belonging to them were not discovered. For that reason we can show only two complete Greek examples, as shown on Plate 53, which can answer as representative of the others. The third example belongs to the Roman.

The first example on this plate is taken from a two-columned Prostyle on the Tower of the Winds at Athens, erected about 159 B C., the details and plan of which are given on Plate 60. The elevation given on this plate shows a side view of this Prostyle but on account of lack of room the spacing of the column and pilaster is shown less than was actually the case. The columns are of a strikingly heavy proportion; this is explained though by their small size, being only 13 feet 6.85 inches high, and also on account of the unusually wide intercolumniation which was 3[…] diameters. The columns stand without base on the upper plinth. A base would not only have shortened the apparent height of the column, but would have obstructed the passage. The application of the plain membered pilaster capital shows us that the Greeks still held it proper to decorate the square differently from the round.

The second example represents the order of the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates at Athens, which was erected of white marble in the most magnificent style at the end of the culminating period of Grecian art. The relations between the column and entablature are excellent, the members are of pleasing and elegant form, and all ornamentation is of the finest origination. We will consider this monument in detail on the next four plates.

The third example shows a Corinthian order from a Roman building of the best epoch. It is from the eight-columned Prostyle of the Pantheon, which was erected shortly before the Christian era. The principal parts are not much at variance with those of the Greek examples, though more so are the form and arrangement of the decorations, mainly on the upper portion of the cornice. We will at Plate 64 treat this order in detail.

In regard to the size of the members it might easily appear in comparison that those on the Roman example are much smaller than those on the two Greek examples, where the members of the base as also the cornice and capital appear larger; but by referring to the measurements on the plate the apparent difference in scale is explained. The order from the Monument of Lysicrates carried out at the size of the Pantheon would be bold and monstrous, while the Pantheon reduced to the size of the other would appear like a model. On the better monuments we find in these respects the correct scale. All parts were calculated for their size as actually to be built, and would at any other size appear too small or too large as they were reduced or enlarged. For this reason the newer authors of the socalled order books are to be very much criticised as they set down rules which are to be applied to orders of all kinds, whether they be 15 feet or 51 feet high, whether the material is dark or light, polished or rough, fine or coarse.