will feel the fitness of this in an instant when you
consider that the principal function of the sloping part in Fig. XII. is
as a prop to the pillar to keep it from _slipping aside_; but the
function of the sloping stone in the cornice and capital is to _carry
weight above_. The thrust of the slope in the one case should therefore
be lateral, in the other upwards.

Sec. III. We will, therefore, take the two figures, _e_ and _h_ of Fig.
XII., and make this change in them as we reverse them, using now the
exact profile of the cornice _a_,--the father of cornices; and we shall
thus have _a_ and _b_, Fig. XIX.

[Illustration: Fig. XIX.]

Both of these are sufficiently ugly, the reader thinks; so do I; but we
will mend them before we have done with them: that at _a_ is assuredly
the ugliest,--like a tile on a flower-pot. It is, nevertheless, the
father of capitals; being the simplest condition of the gathered father
of cornices. But it is to be observed that the diameter of the shaft
here is arbitrarily assumed to be small, in order more clearly to show
the general relations of the sloping stone to the shaft and upper stone;
and this smallness of the shaft diameter is inconsistent with the
serviceableness and beauty of the arrangement at _a_, if it were to be
realised (as we shall see presently); but it is not inconsistent with
its central character, as the representative of every species of
possible capital; nor is its tile and flower-pot look to be regretted,
as it may remind the reader of the reported origin of the Corinthian
capital. The stones of the cornice, hitherto called X and Y, receive,
now that they form the capital, each a separate name; the sloping stone
is called the Bell of the capital, and that laid above it, the Abacus.
Abacus means a board or tile: I wish there were an English word for it,
but I fear there is no substitution possible, the term having been long
fixed, and the reader will find it convenient to familiarise himself
with the Latin one.

Sec. IV. The form of base, _e_ of Fig. XII., which corresponds to this
first form of capital, _a_, was said to be objectionable only because it
_looked_ insecure; and the spurs were added as a kind of pledge of
stability to the eye. But evidently the projecting corners of the abacus
at _a_, Fig. XIX., are _actually_ insecure; they may break off, if great
weight be laid upon them. This is the chief reason of the ugliness of
the form; and the spurs in _b_ ar