Explore the vast range of titles available.

This is the only publication that presents a modern interpretation of the Classical Orders. The new edition of this successful title now includes the proportions in both metric and imperial measurements to make the orders more accessible and to provide a valuable reference for designers.The inclusion of both 100-part and 96-part systems of proportion is underpinned by an essay on James Gibbs - one of the 18th century authors of standardized proportioning systems - and his influence in America. Along with additional plates, this book gives aclear introduction to those not familiar with the classical genre and is an easy to follow guide which assists architects, interior designers and conservators with the quality of their design.

The Classical Orders of Architecture elaborates on the classical orders of architecture, including Classicism, Tuscan orders, Doric orders, Ionic orders, and Corinthian orders.

This plate shows the setting out of the Tuscan entablature in detail, and again shows both versions. A few specific points need to be noted. The capital is turned (circular on plan) up to and including the echinus. The abacus is never round on plan. In the Tuscan and Doric orders it is square, and in the Greek derived Ionic. In the other orders the shape of the abacus is derived from the square. The face of the entablature is aligned with the diameter of the notional upper limit of the column 'produced' through the capital, in accordance with Renaissance - but not earlier - practice. The projection of the cornice is equal to its height, so that the cornice profile is disposed about a line drawn at 45° from the upper end of the frieze. Most of the Renaissance authorities cited accept this height:projection ratio. Lutyens advocated a slightly steeper pitch, and there is a case in each specific application for this angle to be reassessed. It is well established that where oblique forms return through a right angle their pitch tends to be judged by the angle made by the mitre of the two adjoining faces - hipped roofs are a case in point - but as a general rule the angle of 45° will not lead one far astray.

The Composite order is a more artificial invention of Renaissance writers than the other four. Many Roman Corinthian versions exhibit what might be termed proto-composite characteristics, especially in the treatment of the capital, but it does not emerge as a separate order in Roman architecture, and it is unknown to Vitruvius.

The spacing of columns has a considerable effect on the overall appearance of the order. A celebrated example of the sombre, claustrophobic effect of very close column spacing is the mausoleum at Castle Howard, by Hawksmoor. At the other extreme, very widely spaced columns appear to defy the structural constraints of a trabeated system of construction.

Figure (a) shows how the Tuscan order may be set out. I have adopted a column height of 7 diameters, with an entablature of 1.75 and a plinth of 2.1. 0.5 is given to the base and 0.5 to the capital, which projects to a total of c.625 from the centre line, rather more than advocated by early authorities such as Serlio, who envisaged the extremity of the abacus as aligning with the base diameter. In accordance with the sequence of dimensions I have worked out for the pedestals of the orders, the die of the Tuscan pedestal is fractionally over-square, being 1.4 wide × 1.35 high.

The introduction to the second edition explains the genesis of my 96-part orders. My first response to the call for a non-metric method of proportioning was to convert the 100-part scale directly to one of 96 parts, with a view to simply applying the new modular dimensions to the same set of orders as in the first edition. (One possibility was to reproduce the orders flanked by both sets of scales - on the same drawing - but I soon decided that that was a recipe for confusion.) Direct translation of the decimal values, given in the first edition, into a 96-part system produced some very awkward fractions, so it was apparent that some redrafting would be needed to round out the complicated figures involved.

A logical method of extending the use of the orders to embrace a building of more than one storey is the superimposition of one order upon another. The most famous ancient example is the Colosseum at Rome, which has no less than four storeys of superimposed orders. Among Renaissance architects it was Palladio who most refined the technique of superimposition, and many of his designs for villas feature 'double-decker' orders as the central element of the façade.

The capital, described in more detail in plate 31, consists in essence of a complete Ionic capital seated upon the lower two thirds of the Corinthian capital. In the interests of consistency, having finished the Ionic architrave with two unequal faces, I have divided the Composite architrave similarly, though the dimensions are here increased in accordance with the greater overall height of the whole entablature. The same constraints govern the projection of the lower members of the cornice as for the Corinthian: they are compressed in order to allow a generous width to the soffit of the corona. I have deliberately allowed some minor variations of dimensions between this cornice and that of the Corinthian if only to emphasise that these are by no means sacrosanct provided the dominance of such elements as the crowning cyma is not jeopardised. The profile adopted for this cyma and its supporting mouldings agrees with the upper profile in plate 24 (a), as for an external order, but as with the Corinthian order alternative sections are appropriate. 29 The Composite Capital And Entablature