1801.] Hyperbole in Converfation.-Mr. Holt of Walton. 793

Nichols, 1778." It formed two volumes of imperial folio, and had the honour to be placed in feveral royal libraries. Though I had not the pleafure of perfonally knowing him, I have heard much of the amiableness of

his character.

Permit me now to add a little to
your correfpondent Secunder's remarks
on the hyperbole in converfation, p.
705, which I was much pleafed with;
and fhall be happy if he occafions a
reform in our language, which cer-
tainly ought to be kept at a juft ftan-
dard, and not, like our habits, regu-
lated only by the caprice of a few dash
ing fashionables, fo that a plain country
female is as much at a lofs for language
as drefs; for the one as well as the
other has no medium. Secunder has
omitted the capital title, which em-
braces every thing from head to foot;
for I have actually heard of capital shoes
from those who have received a claffic
education. I fmiled one day at my
butcher recommending a capital head
(of a calf) to me, as he little knew
Nor
how appropriate the term was.
fhould I be furprized to hear of an im-
menfe houfe having a capital cellar.
Dashing may be indulged to pretty
matters and milles, with kicking up
rows, or duft, with fuch like funny ex-
preffious, as a fubftitute for true hu-
mour; though, I would juft hint to
them, it borders very near on the vul-
gar cant.

Pleafant men and women are a late
race of beings. I cannot yet help af-
fixing the idea of eafy and trifling to
the term; but, as in ftrictnefs every
thing pleafing muft be pleafant, I be-
gin to think it of the fame meaning as
agreeable ufed to be. However, I can
never be reconciled to a pleafant prea
cher; nor could I ever like a fine fer-
mon, or a fine man in the pulpit. I
with whatever is ferious to have a fe-
rious epithet. I wish too ftyle was
confined to writing and fpeaking: I do
not like dreffing or living in ftyle. I
will only add one more inftance out of
true ftyle, which, to my furprize, I
have met with in one of our most ele-
gant prefent writers-a great many. It
was, no doubt, a flip of the pen, but
it must be in confequence of inattention
in common fpeech. I hope I fhall be
pardoned for intruding on the depart
ment of your fex, criticifm; and am
your very old correfpondent, EUSEBIA.
GENT. MAG. September, 1801.

Mr. URBAN, Paradife Row, Aug.28.
HAVE the pleafure to fend you a
late
I
your
very ftriking likeness of
excellent correfpondent, Mr. JOHN
HOLT, of Walton (fee Plate II.);
whofe character you have already deli-
neated with ftrict fidelity. The draw-
ing is by a refpectable young gentle
man, Mr. W. Rogers, who was his
pupil, and by whom an excellent etch-
ing of it has fince been given to his
friends. The original plate would be
at your fervice, but is of a fize too
large for the Magazine. Mr. Holt's
MSS. and materials for the "Hiftory
of Liverpool" are bequeathed to his
friend Mr. Matthew Gregfon, of that
town; with a requeft that, if they are
fold, ten pounds or guineas of the
money arifing from the fale may be
given to the Liverpool Infirmary.

VIT

Yours, &e.

J. N.

(Continued from p. 704.) GRECIAN ARCHITECTURE. No. IV. ITRUVIUS immediately proceeds to give minute directions for the formation of the epifiyle, the profile whereof, as feen fig. 1, refembles little fteps, called in the epiftyle the firft, fecond, and third facia; and the like form, taken from the two upper facias, exprefled by fuperioribus men exhibited on the dados of the tylobris in the above lat-cited paffage, is bates; but, confined to the dado only, and not permitted to run on like the facias of the epiftyle, they neceffarily fall into the form of raifed pannels one on the other, and thus refembling. little fteps were named by our mafter fcamilli, a diminutive of feamnum, a ftep or foot-ftool; and, fince the upper ftep or pannel was of course less than that it projects from, they are truly impares, i. e. unlike in fize. Thus is developed to demonftration the whole myftery of the celebrated scamilli impares of Vitruvius; which have both the defired effect of taking away the trench-like appearance as feen in the fore-fhortened fide of the continued ftylobate, ornament to the dado, or die, which is fig. 2, and are alfo a very becoming too plain without them. And as fome readers, Mr. Urban, may probably with to have the devices of the ingenious and learned authors mentioned next Number the opinions of Philanin the beginning of this letter, in the der, Bertanus, Barbaro, Perrault, Sca

mozzi

mozzi, and the very learned Bernardinus Baldus, shall be faithfully given, with fhort verbal refutations to each.

PHILO-TECHNON.

P.S. 1, 2, 3, in fig. 1, the facias of the epiftyle, fhewing the refemblance they bear to the feamilli or pannels on the dado of the ftylobate, and are gaged-work.

SSSSS fhew the foamilli impures. DD, the naked of the dado, or die, of ftylobate in front and fide.

GRECIAN ARCHITECTURE. No. V. Mr. URBAN, Portfea, Aug. 6, PURSUANT to engagement, herein are defcribed the various defigns of the most celebrated commentators of Vitruvius, explanatory of the fcamilli impares. And firft, Philander's: this author fuggefis three devices, one or other of which he thought might probably be the meaning of our matter. Firft, a fwell on the die of the ftylobate, in imitation of the entafis, or fwell, which Vitruvius orders in the fhaft of a column. But this is quite inadmiffible, for it neither is aflimilated to any thing in the epiftyle, as required by our mafter, nor can impares be applied to it. His fecond device is the introduction of fwathes one on the other through the middle of the die; refembling, by their edges under the cornice and above the bale of ftylobate, the facias on the epiftyle, of which they are a very clofe imitation; yet this device lies open to one objection, which is, that it leaves too great a part of the naked of the dye under the cornice and above the bafe, producing two continued uninterrupted planes hedged in, as it were, by the rifing of the fiathes along the middles of the dies, and thus not fufficiently removing the trench-like appearance. His third invention, which he declares himfelf in favour of, was to make the whole profile of the entire ftylobate return and ftand inwards at the parts between the ftylobates, and thus the eye, amused by this outstanding of the entire ftylobates, would lofe the idea of a trench: and moft certainly it would; but then this effect is not produced by the feamilli impures which Philander himfelf fays are gradili, i. e. little fteps, which in this device are quite out of the queftion: nor is this breaking-in and fianding-out of the whole profile an addition to the middle of the ftylobate, or

to the middle of any thing. Again: what becomes, in this cafe, of the correfpondence with the epiftyle in their upper members as required by the document of Vitruvius? When Philander came to this paflage, perceiving, no doubt, that the doctrine here was incompatible with this device, he paffed over it without a word of explanation.

Bertanus laboured hard to explain the fcamilli impares, but by fome ftrange infatutation miftook the meaning of Vitruvius fo completely, as to run away with a notion, that the addition by the fcamilli was intended to procure and not to obviate the trench-like appearance; and for this purpofe he affumed the fwathes of Philander's fecond device, and continued them through the whole dado, adding to the middle of the upper fwathe little beads; and thus completed two trenches in

ftead of the one which our mafter has

provided againft. This is already re- \ futed.

Barbaro comes next: he adopted the laft idea of the three of Philander, and infifis upon it that this is what Vitruvius intended; though he confefles that the term fcamilli impares is of uncertain, meaning, and indeed, to judge from his ftrange explanation of the matter, we may give him credit for his aflertion, that it was indeed very uncertain to him. But now to attend to

Perrault, whofe learned and curious comment on Vitruvius, in general, claims our particular efteem: he has however on this fubject (and fome few others) done himfelf no great credit by fervilely following Philander and Barbaro, and adopting their project of breaking the profile of the ftylobate into recefles as the intervals; and then attempts, what Philander prefumed not, to reconcile the fecond-cited paffage of Vitruvius to his idea, by ma king out a correspondence with what is done beneath, in breaking the epiftyle in like manner; an overfight this, that muft aftonish any perfon acquainted with Perrault's extentive genius and highly-improved talents in the fcience of architecture. Strange indeed it muft appear if he really did not perceive the evident contradiction in this device to the exprefs injunétions of our mafter, and the manifest abfurdity it involves. The cafe feems to be that unable, all Perrault as he was, to unravel the meaning of the terms care

the term exæquari, though used in various fignifications by various authors, was appropriated by workmen (to whom Vitruvius is here giving directions) to what we call getting-out any portion of work, and in this paffage directs the ftylobate to be fo got-out that, &c. as explained in laft number. And ad æqualem modulum, in the fecond paffage as rendered by Perrault, has no meaning whatever; for, faying it muft not be by the level but by an equal manner, he might as well have faid 'nothing; and yet he corrects the text to enable himself to fay this much. Whereas a fchoolboy, fhould he approach the mafon's bench and take up the inftrument defcribed in laft number, he would naturally call it a little measure, certainly called modulus in Latin; and, fhould the boy ask the mafon why fuch hollows, rounds, and fillets, were cut out on the edge, would he not be informed that they are to guide the mouldings on the ftone-work, being cut fo equal to their profile, that they fall-in exactly with them? hence it is named in Latin æqualis modulus; and is not this in English called the gage? Now, it is very evident by inpection of Fig. 1. laft Number, that the face of the epiftyle muft be got-out by the gage, the moulding at the top and the three facias precluding the ufe of the level, by which inftrument plane even furfaces only can be proved and got-out. And as Vitruvius had not till that occafion mentioned the epiftyle, he touches on the fubject in this paffage for the fake of enforcing the document of refembling the feamilli by the two upper members being got-out by the gage, as the faid fcamilli were before got-out in the ftylobate: faying, in fummis columnarum feapis, non ad libellam fed ad æqualem modulum cóllocatis. Perrault corrects the patlage and fays it fhould be read cum epiftylus, not reflecting that the expreflion, in fummis fcapis collocatis, is the Latin for the Greeks, which written in Latin characters is epiftylium; and this his mifunderstanding of the expreffion contributed to puzzle the caufe ftill more. Now, it is prefumed, that if Baldus was to return to life again, he would acquiefce in this explanation of the two paffages in queftion, and return in good humour with his own device of the railed unequal panels; thus proved, far beyond a mere probability,

But, baffled by his mifapprehenfion of to be the scamilli impares of Vitruvius. the fecond-cited paffage, he put his more concordant with the affimilation brain to the stretch to find fomething required by our Mafler; but first starts objections to hisfirst invention,as that he did not recollect to have feen these pannels on the die in any of the works of flated column amongft fuch works? the antique: but who ever faw an inYet Vitruvius clearly taught that docuentafis. Again: Baldus fays, again ment which the Greeks, he fays, called Baldus, that, if nothing more than thefe raifed pannels had been intended, Vitruvius might eafily have explained promifing a defign: very true; and fo them by a verbal defcription without might he have defcribed the entafis; yet he promised a design for both the one and the other. Thefe arguments therefore are but weak, but the beft he could find to apologize for his new device of which he feems extremely tenacious; and it is, to carry up thefe fcamilli from the die, and place them under the bafes of the columns on the tops of the ftylobates, in order to raife the bafes up and to bring them into fight; fince, when the cornice of the flylobate was above the eye, the bafes of the columns cut off by the projection of the cornice might be judged by the beholder to be funk in a trench. Thus does he leave the continued plane of the dado hedged a real trench-like appearance, along in by the projection of the bafe and cornice, without its remedy, which he now applies to obviate an imaginary trench; and injudiciously attempts to clude a natural effect of the optics, violates the instruction of our Mafter, who is evidently treating not of any thing above, but of the formation of the fiylobate itfelf; raifes the bafes of the columns by two fubplinths under their awkward height; impedes the paffage own natural plinth to a ridiculous and of the wings by thefe intruding projectures, and, by an abfurdity unequalled by Moorish barbarity, carries thefe fcamilli and places them on the abacus of the capitals to form a refemblance with what is done beneath; and thus raifes the foffit of the epiftyles aridiculous height, contrary to common bove the capitals to an unnatural and fenfe and the practice of all the architects that ever lived. And all this to obviate a proper and natural effect of

the

that I am, dear coufen, your most affec- TWENTY years having elapfed