S90

THEORY OF
AIICIIITECTUKE. l)o(
from the aiiglcb of the plan as tliore are ribs intciukd. until tluy mutually intersect each
otiier. Tlie curvatures of the ribs will be clonj^atea as they recede from the primiti\
arch, till tliey reach the centre on the place wlure the groins cross, and where of course the
flongat.d curve is a maximijm The rihs thus form, when they are of the same curvature,
portions of an inveited conoid.
1499j. In the next example
i Ji<t.
59?i/i-), the primitive arches are unequal in height, thi;
ai-ch A i)eing higher than 15 'I'he jilan remains tlie same as in that immediately preceding;
but from the inecjuality of heiglit, a d, c b, must be joined by curved lines, determined on
one side by the point a. where e a intersects th^' 1 mger arch. A curved summit rib. as
well longitudinal! V as transversely, may occur with equal or unequal heights of primitive
<rches (as in
Jig.
59'Ji.)
;
but the stellar form on the plan still remains, though diHerei.tly
niodilied, with the same, or a less or greater, number of ribs on the plan
(Jiff.
590k. ). By
truncating, as it were, the summit ribs, level or otherwise, with the tops of the primitive
arches, and introducing en tlie plan a jiolygon or a circle touching quadiants inscribed in
the square, we obtain, by means of (he rising conoidal
quadrants, figures which perform the office of a key-
stone. In this, as we have aliove observed, the con-
struction of the work is totally diff'eient from rih
vaulting, inasmuch as each course, in rising, supports
the next, after the manner of a dome, and is not de-
pendent on ribs for carrying the filling-in pieces.
Hence the distinction between fanwork and radiating
rib work so judiciously made by Mr. Willis.
1499aa. The sixth example
(Jiff-
590/.) has pri-
mitive arches of ditferent heights, forming an irre-
gular star on plan, that is to say, the points are of
different angles. The figure will scarcely need ex-
planation after what has been already said in relation
ti) the subject
I499i''. A polygonal space may be vaulted in
three different ways. First, by a central column
serving for the recejjtion of the ribs of the vault, the
:olumn or pillar performing In such case the office of a wall, as in the chapter-houses of
Worcester, Salisbury, Wells, and Lincoln. This mode evidently admits of the largest
sjiace being covered, on account of the subdivision of the whole area by means of the
Central pillar. The second mode is by a pendent for the reception of the arches, as in the
Lady Chapel at Caudebec, (given in the section Wasonrv). This mode is necess;irily re-
jtricted in practice to small spans, on account of the limits attached to the power of
materials; albeit in theory its range is as extensive as the former. The last method is by at
Fig.SOO;.
once vaulting the space from wall to wall, as in
Jiff.
590m., like the vaulting to the kitchen
of the monastery of Durham Cathidral, or.
Jiff.
.590n., similar to the chai)ter-house at York,
of which, the upper part being of wood. Ware quaintly observes,
"
The people of Yorkshire
fondly admire and justly boast of their cathedral and chapter-house. The principle of
vaulting at the chapter-house may be admired and imagined in stone; not so the vaidt of
the nave
;
it is manifestlv one of those sham productions which cheat here tl)ere is no
merit in deceiving." The principle, as Ware justly observes, is perfectly m isonie, and
might be easily carried out with stone ribs and panel stones, it being nothing more than
an extension of that exhibited in the third examjjle of simple groining
(Jiff.
590/.;
above
given; and the same remark apulies to the Durham kitchen.
I499ec We propose to offer explanations of the nature of the vaulting at King's College
Chapel at Cainbridge, and the silly story related by Walpole of Sir Christopher Wren,
raying, "that if <?ny man would show him wnere to jilacc the lir.'jt stone he would