2()2 GRECIAN ARCHITECTURE. Tart I. for the forms of Egyptian temples, which had no pillars externally. Mere as perfect, and in the hands of the Greeks wonld have become as beautiful, as the one they adoi^ted. Besides, it is natural to suppose they would rather have copied the larger than the smaller temples, if no motive existed for their preference of the latter. The peristyle, too, was ill-suited for an ambulatory, or place for processions to circu- late round the temple ; it was too narrow for this, and too high to protect the procession from the rain. Indeed, I know of no suggestion except that it may have been adopted to protect the paintings on the walls of the cells from the inclemency of the weather. It hardly admits of a doubt that the walls were painted, and that without pro- tection of some sort this would very soon have been obliterated. It seems also very evident that the ]^eristyle was not only practically, but artistically, most admirably adapted for this ])urpose. The paintings of the Greeks were, like those of the Egyi)tians, composed of numerous detached groups, connected only by the story, and it almost required the intervention of j)illars, or some means of dividing into compartments the surface to be so painted, to separate these groups from one another, and to prevent the whole sequence from being seen at once ; Avhile, on the other hand, nothing can have been more beautiful than the white marble columns relieved against a richly-colored plane surface. The one ap]>ears so necessary to the other, that it seems hardly to be doubted that this was the cause, or that the effect must have been most surpassingly beautiful. Mode of Lightiistg Temples. The arrangement of the interior of Grecian temples necessarily depended on the mode in which they Avere lighted. No one will, I believe, noAv contend, as was once done, that it was by lamplight alone that the beauty of their interiors could be seen ; and as light certainly was not introduced through the side walls, nor could be in sufficient quantities through the doorways, it is only from the roof that it could be admitted. At the same time it could not have been by a large horizontal opening in the roof, as has been supposed, as that would have admitted the rain and snow as well as the light ; and the only alternative seems to be one I suggested some years ago — of a clerestory,! similar internally to that found in all the great ' The reasons wliifh iiKhiccd ine to suggest an "ojiaion" or clerestory instead of an " liypietliron" or skyliglit, were fully set forth in the " True Principles of TJeanty in Art," in 1S49. I afterwards suhniitted a paper on the same suhject to the Institute of British Architects in i ISGl. On this occasion a considerable amount of discussion took place; but no valid objection was brought forward against my views, except, of course their novelty, and their being opposed to authority.
