nd the
same. This is not correct. Neither roof nor steeple is assumed to have
such correspondence, and Wren might surely be allowed a like liberty
with his dome. As Mr. Wightwick very properly says, it will be time
enough to find fault when the roofs of churches are the same outside
as within.

The Romans are credited with first applying the Dome to larger
buildings. It travelled eastward to Constantinople, and was in use in
Italy during mediaeval times. The word "Dome" is derived from the
_Duomo_ of Florence, where Brunelleschi covered in the octagon with
his famous cupola in the earlier part of the fifteenth century.[88]
But Wren's particular study was the Pantheon, which we have no
evidence whatever that he saw; and, indeed, he erected his dome
without having ever seen, so far as we know, anything like it.

A few words will suffice for the main features. The first stage of the
superstructure is the Stylobate, of 25 feet in height and some 140 to
145 feet in diameter. The next, the Peristyle or Colonnade which
lights up the interior. It has thirty-two Composite columns of a
height of 38 feet, including the pedestals. Every fourth
intercolumnation is filled up with an ornamental niche (if the term be
allowable for a recess of the size) to hide the supports behind. This
alternation, while it agreeably affects the play of light and shade,
yet allows a partial glimpse of the supports. Why could not Wren have
done as much with his curtain wall? Above the peristyle comes the
Stone Gallery with its balustrade--a great attraction for
visitors--just about half-way up to the summit of the cross. Here the
diameter decreases by the breadth of the gallery to 108 feet, and the
Tholobate[89] rises. It has pilasters, with lights between, in the
upper parts. Above is the outer dome proper--the spherical part--with
a further contraction to 102 feet. Wren had the advantage of St.
Peter's to profit by, and abstained from inserting the "luthern"
lights of the larger edifice. The absence of these and the ribbing of
the lead coating was, in his opinion, "less Gothic." The lights,
again, could not easily have been reached for repairs; and if left
unrepaired would have been the means of causing injury to the
supporting timbers underneath. The effect, no doubt, is better, and
the lighting above and below sufficient for the stairs leading to the
lantern.

[Illustration: _Photo. S.B. Bolas & Co._
THE LANTERN, FROM THE CLOCK TOWER.]