All varieties of Roman columns, other than those distinctly marked by the design of their capitals as Ionic, Corinthian, or Composite, are termed Tuscan {Etruscan), unless it is known that the frieze is decorated with triglyphs, which in Roman work thus again become the distinguishing feature of the Doric Order.

There are but three instances of the use of the Doric Order in Rome itself, although it was often employed in Pompeii, Asia Minor, Syria, and Northern Africa; and the few other Italian examples are almost invariably circumscribed by individual peculiarities in each particular case, and are probably the product of Greek workmen and closely copied from Greek Doric forms.

Difference between the Greek and Roman Doric Orders. All the Roman orders differ in the relation of the column heights to their diameters, but a certain amount of resemblance is traceable to the earlier Greek form in both the Ionic and the Corinthian. This is perhaps least true of the typical Roman Doric, taking the form given by Vignola as typical, as this Roman Doric column is less like the Greek form than either of the other Orders.

The Doric column of the Romans is eight diameters in height as compared to the seven diameters of the Greek Order, and is one-seventh of its base diameter less at the neck; and it therefore differs, by the height of an entire diameter more than the other Roman Orders, from the general proportions of the Greek originals.

Aside from differences of proportion in the column shaft itself, and the different method of fluting the late Roman column, there is a very radical difference in the treatment of the entablature; while Vignola has given in the pedestal an addition which first appears in the architecture of the Romans. There is very reasonable doubt whether any true Roman precedent can be found to sanction the use of this innovation with any Order, least of all with the Doric column. In the Temple at Cora, which must be considered as of Greek workmanship even though occurring under the Roman regime, the apparent pedestal shown in Fig. 107 is really a large buttress confining the step approach to the Temple. This cut also illustrates the close relationship that exists between the early Roman work and its Greek originals.

The Roman Doric Order, as used in the first examples, varied but little from the preceding Greek types. The column generally has no base, while the echinus and the fluting of the column closely follow the Greek sections

Fig. 107. Detail of Greek Doric Order. From Temple of Hercules at Cori.

Fig. 107. Detail of Greek Doric Order. From Temple of Hercules at Cori.

Temple at Cora, Italy. The only extant example of a rectangular Roman Doric temple is the one at Corn, the exact date of which is not known; but from probably contemporaneous remains, it has been thought that it is at least as early as SO B. C. In the remains of this temple (Fig. 107), the column, although given a base, otherwise very closely resembles the Greek Doric Order; and the triglyph is placed on the corner angle of the building after the Greek custom.

Fig. 107 is a reproduction of one of the famous Brune drawings now owned by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The temple is square in plan, has a four-column or hexastyle portico, and in the main differs but little from preceding Greek work. The cornice includes a mutule over the metope, and a triglyph used on each face of the corner angles; and many of the moulding sections, as well as the fluting of the columns, are distinctively Greek. On the other hand the triglyphs are of different proportions, and the column has a base; while other of the mouldings-such, for instance, as those on the ants or pilasters-indicate the effects of Roman influence. This drawing is so arranged that the cornice is shown complete, with a part of the tile roof; and the column is cut so that the necking and the base, with the crowning mouldings of the stylobate or pedestal are both plainly displayed; while a plan of the underside or soffit of the cornice is shown at the right of the column. This pedestal is in reality only a projecting buttress, enclosing the space of the step approach, its top being level with the floor of the platform or stylobate. These early buildings were probably all executed by Greek workmen, which explains their close adherence to the Greek forms.

Use of Triglyph at Corner Angle. In all the early examples of the use of the Roman Doric Order employed in buildings square or rectangular in plan, the triglyph is used on the corner of the angle after the Greek fashion, as is further shown m the drawings of fragments of the Roman remains at Cora, the modern Cori. (Figs. 107 and 109).

The Temple at Cora, as well as some remains of Roman Doric temples dating from about 200 B. C. and possibly restored at a later period, indicates, by the narrow intercolumniation at the corner, as shown on the old floor plan, that the triglyphs occurred on the angle after the Greek fashion. On the tomb of Scipio (Fig. 108) and the two tombs at Norchia, as well as on the pedestals shown in Fig. 100, the triglyphs always occur on the angles. In the three uses of this l96

Order in Rome-the Tabulariuin, the Theater of Marcellus, and the Colosseum-the problem of the corner angle is not presented, on account of the circular plan of the building and the form and treatment of the Order in each cuse.

Fragments from Temple at Cora. The fragments of architectural design gathered together in Fig. 109-which reproduces another of the beautiful drawings by Emanuel Brune and is probably one of the most interesting architectural renderings in existence, both on account of the beauty of the details selected and also on account of the brilliant draftsmanship shown in the execution of the drawing-were taken from the ancient Roman temples at Cora, Italy, and show, along with the several interesting Doric details, a few of more elaborate character. At the bottom and left of the drawing is a fluted pedestal, such as might be employed to carry a figure or some other piece of sculpture. Then, in the foreground, is shown the base of a fluted column of the Attic type. Above this is a most beautiful drawing of a Corinthian capital, with interesting variations from the strictly Classical type in the arrangement of some of the leaf forms, and especially in two horns or tendrils inserted in the position usually occupied by the smaller volutes. The acanthus leaves of the capital are notably crisp and strong in treatment; they follow closely the outline of the column, and end at the top in a spiral, strongly supported and yet with a graceful outward bend. (This capital will afterward be referred to in the description of the Corinthian Order.) A little further to the right are two examples of Doric capitals, showing portions of the neck and bases of the columns.

Early Roman Doric 0800147

Fig. 108.

Fig. 109 Fragments from early Roman Temples at Cori, Italy,

Fig. 109 Fragments from early Roman Temples at Cori, Italy,.

Beyond these is another portion of a column base, probably used with a Corinthian or Ionic column, here carrying a small fragment with mask decoration.

The two moulded bases described above show evident experiments on the part of their designers in the use of this form of base. In the one last mentioned, two torus mouldings are separated only by a fillet; while in the one first mentioned, there is a very narrow and apparently much crushed hollow member between the fillets separating the torus mouldings.

These fragments are all placed in front of a cornice with beautifully carved egg-and-dart and bead-and-reel mouldings, supporting rather awkwardly-proportioned brackets carrying the crowning members of the cornice. Above this cornice, in the center of the drawing, is a base supporting a capital of rather unusual design. In the center of each side, occupying the space between the volutes, is a severely classic head of Minerva. The corners are supported by simple but strong and heavy volutes. The abacus is similar to that on the early Corinthian capitals. At the right and left of this capital are pedestals carrying Doric cornices not unlike in treatment to the cornice of the Tomb of Scipio. In the background are several pieces of architectural fragments. Another round pedestal is here placed at the left of the plate; while the tall square pedestal carries a small antcfix decorated with a Greek anthemioii motif. At the right is a panel of lettering, and above this an ornamental cresting of a honeysuckle motif, which shows in the reproduction almost as dark as the Classic landscape in the distance.

The beautiful lettering in this panel, and also on the face of the square pedestal immediately in front of it, should be noticed. All the details shown on this plate are thoroughly Greek in both treatment and feeling, and were undoubtedly executed by Greek workmen and architects, at an early period in the development of Roman architecture.