Severus and in the thermae of Diocletian, the upper fillet of the volute runs straight across the capital, being partially sunk in the cavetto of the abacus; in the canalis of the volutes of all these examples is a band of foliage which dips down to carry the centre flower, and, on account of its projection, it hides, from those looking only from below, the upper fillet of the volute.
|
| Tuscan. Doric. Ionic. Corinthian. Composite. |
| Fig. 14.—The Italian Orders. |
The architects of the Revival, therefore, in their studies of the capital, turned the volutes (which they would seem, like Ruskin, to have thought were horns) down on to the top of the echinus, producing a composition which is not in accordance with ancient examples and shows ignorance of the origin and development of the Ionic volute; unfortunately their interpretations of the Composite capital were followed by Inigo Jones, and are employed even in Regent Street, London, at the present day; there are, however, two or three Renaissance examples in Paris, in which the true Composite capital has been retained.
The Pedestal.—The architects of the Revival would seem to have conceived the idea that no order was complete without a pedestal. The only Roman examples of isolated columns with pedestals known are those of the columns of Trajan, Marcus Aurelius, Antoninus Pius and others of less importance, but they carried statues only and had no structural functions as supports to an entablature; the pedestals under the columns which decorated the arches of triumph were built into and formed part of the structure of the arch. The columns of the tepidarium of the Roman thermae had pedestals of moderate height (about 3 to 4 ft.) which bore no proportional relation to the diameter of the column. Vignola, however, gave definite proportions for the pedestal, which in the Doric order was to be 2 diameters in height, in the Ionic 212 diameters, and in the Corinthian order 3 diameters, the result being that in the front of the church of St John Lateran, where the Corinthian pilasters are of great height, the pedestals are 12 to 13 ft. high. In conjunction with the arcade there was more reason for pedestals to the semi-detached columns on the upper storeys, but none was employed on the ground storey, either in the theatre of Marcellus or in the Colosseum. (R. P. S.)
ORDER, HOLY. “Holy Orders” (ordines sacri) may be
defined as the rank or status of persons empowered by virtue
of a certain form or ceremony to exercise spiritual functions in
the Christian church. Thus Tertullian (Idol. 7, Monog. 11)
mentions the “ecclesiastical order,” including therein those
who held office in the church, and (Exhort. Cast. 71) he distinguishes
this ordo from the Christian plebs or laity. We may
compare the common use of the word ordo in profane writers,
who refer, e.g., to the ordo senatorius, ordo equester, &c. It is
true that the evidence of Tertullian does not carry us back
farther than the close of the 2nd or opening of the 3rd
century A.D. But a little before Tertullian, Irenaeus, though
he does not use the word ordo, anticipates in some measure
Tertullian’s abstract term, for he recognizes a magisterii locus,
“a place of magistracy” or “presidency” in the church. Indeed,
phrases more or less equivalent occur in the sub-apostolic literature,
and even in the New Testament itself, such as those who
are “over you in the Lord” (1 Thess. v. 12), those “that bear
the rule” (Heb. xiii. 7; cf. 1 Clem. i. 3; Herm. Vis. ii. 2, 6). Here we pause to remark that in Tertullian’s view the church as a whole possesses the power of self-government and administration, though in the interest of discipline and convenience it delegates that power to special officers. It is, he says, the “authority of the church” which has constituted the difference between the governing body and the laity, and in an emergency a layman may baptize and celebrate (Exhort. Cast. 7), nor can this statement be lightly set aside on the plea that Tertullian, when he so wrote, had lapsed into Montanism. The fact is that the Montanists represented the conservatism of their day, and even now the Roman Church admits the right of laymen to baptize when a priest cannot be had. The Apostolic Constitutions (viii. 32)
