Lacunaria.
One further merit of the restoration just described is, that it entirely gets over the difficulty of the Lacunaria of the peristyle, which rendered Lieut. Smith’s proposal so inadmissible. With the arrangement of the columns here suggested, and the dimensions obtained for the cella, the greatest width to be spanned in front and rear is only 14 Greek feet—2 feet 8 inches less than Mr. Pullan makes it. Although it is just such an increase as this that makes the difficulty in most cases, neither of these dimensions ought to be considered insuperable, inasmuch as in the Propylæa at Athens a marble roof is thrown over a clear space of 18 feet 6 inches English; and though it may be suggested that the roof over these Lacunaria was lighter, that does not alter the case. No part of the external roof of the Mausoleum rested on these beams, and they therefore were not affected by its weight.
It is not necessary here to go into a detailed examination of the one lacunar stone that has been found and brought home. Mr. Pullan thinks it requires a 10 feet intercolumniation, Mr. Cockerell one of 8 feet 9 inches; but neither know, or can know, what part of the building it comes from, or whether it was placed lengthways or transversely to the beams. Under these circumstances there would be no difficulty in finding it a place, either in the long lacunaria at either end of the cella, or the shorter ones in the flanks, or in the square ones which are found at each angle of the building; or, if none of these will do, one may be provided internally to suit any shape. There is, in fact, no direct evidence bearing on this subject; but my impression is, that the arrangement of the roof, as suggested by the intercolumniation here adopted, must have been a singularly pleasing one. The four great lacunaria at the angles, being exactly square, would not only be very grand in themselves, but form a pleasing transition between the two other forms which ornament the flanks and front.
As all these points will be more easily understood by an inspection of the plans and sections, it is unnecessary to add more verbally about them here; and it only remains to say a few words about the sculpture and the pedestals on which it stood, before concluding the description of the building.
Before doing so it may be as well to recapitulate some of the principal measures obtained from the preceding investigation.
Basing the whole on the width of the principal step, or 21 Greek inches, equal to 1 Babylonian cubit, we found 2 cubits, or 3 ft. 6 in., equal to the distance between one Lion’s head and the next; three Lions’ heads, or 6 cubits, equal to one intercolumniation; six intercolumniations, or 36 cubits, equal to 63 feet, or the length of the cella; twice that, 126 feet, or 72 cubits, equal to the length of the lower step, which is also the height of the building without the quadriga. The lower step of the pyramid was 100 feet by 80, its spread 40 feet in one direction by 32 in the other, the meta 20 feet by 16—all in the ratio of 5 to 4; the cella internally, 42 feet by 52 ft. 6 in., or as 4 is to 5; externally, 52 ft. 6 in. by 63 ft., or as 5 is to 6—these three dimensions being in the ratio of 4, 5, and 6; the peristyle one intercolumniation on the flanks, one and a half in front. Measured transversely across the base, we found—
| Ft. | In. | Cubits. | ||
| For the width of the cella | 42 | 0 | or | 24 |
| Twice 21 for the width of the peristele is | 42 | 0 | ” | 24 |
| 5 ft. 3 in. × 2 equal to 10 ft. 6 in. for the pedestals | 10 | 6 | ” | 6 |
| 5 ft. 3 in. × 2equ”to 10 ft”6 in.xxfor the steps | 10 | 6 | ” | 6 |
| ——— | — | |||
| Length of lower step | 105 | 0 | = | 60 |
Lengthways we found—
| Ft. | In. | Cubits. | ||
| For the length of the cella | 63 | 0 | or | 36 |
| Width of the stairs or sepulchral chamber 21 ft. × 2 | 42 | 0 | ” | 24 |
| Width of pedestals and steps as above | 21 | 0 | ” | 12 |
| ——— | — | |||
| Length of lower step | 126 | 0 | = | 72[23] |