Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACKS and Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE

The Frame of Time: First & Last Ratios of Greenway Architectural Practice in Antipodes Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK and Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE These Notes have been stimulated by a visit, in March 2018, by U3A Canberra to Goulburn’s Bradley Grange preparatory to a visit next day to Sydney’s Hyde Park Barrack, with a view to comparing the two designs created by Francis Howard Greenway. The Notes are compiled towards facilitating such comparison that other visitors may care to make. The Notes assume that Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE has already been visited, and so the comparisons begin, after some introductory remarks, with a supposed stance outside the HYDE PARK BARRACK complex. Architectural historian Morton Earle Herman says HYDE PARK BARRACK, mooted by Governor Macquarie in 1814 and commenced in 1817, was Greenway’s first opportunity to plan ‘in the grand manner’. Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE, designed c.1832, apparently was the last opportunity to do so. Both complexes • are officially recognised by the NSW Office of Heritage as Greenway designs; • are designed on the same principles; share and exhibit the same standards of measurement; • present the same dimensions and distances, though differently configured; • incorporate similar historical references; • exhibit the same commitment to the architecture of ‘place’ as dimensionally unique; • celebrate the distinctive character of their clientele; • present the same proportionality between English and metric measures. The clear similarity in style between the two complexes is moderated by the different functional and structural requirements of a residential complex in the one and a steam-powered industrial complex in the other. For example, note the different brickwork bonds; similar use of rubbing bricks and tuck-pointing above the windows and doorways; the different load-bearing requirements determining wall thickness; the presence and absence of stone string-course; similar proportional arrangement for the diminishing size of windows on the 3 levels of Steam Mills and Dormitory, and for the number of window panes; the different shapes (square? / rectangular) of window panes; similar structural use of triangular pediments and wide overhanging eaves; absence of ceilings, allowing full appreciation of different but allied innovative roof structures. Instead of commentary upon matters of ‘style’ these Notes concentrate on other features of the designs, exhibited especially in their dimensional measurements. Cf. Plan and Elevations of HYDE PARK BARRACK, based on annotated measurements taken on site in 1929 by Morton Earle Herman and included in his book The Early Australian Architects and Their Work, Sydney (Angus & Robertson)1954. Herman’s drawings present their own challenges for interpretation; which might be enlightened by the outcome of a major measured drawings exercise on the surviving structures, recently carried out at HYDE PARK BARRACK. Much of this commentary is based on the Scales 1: 100 @ A1 of those drawings, by the archivist, supplemented by reference to some of the original Site Notes upon which the Drawings are based, and by spot measurements on site by me, and perhaps corroborated by you the reader. The analysis herein should be regarded as preliminary; your welcomed input can contribute to revision. (See HPB measurements here) The measurements of Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE used here derive from the actual annotated metric measurements written on drawings of the current structures recorded by Coupe Hewitt + Cserhalmi Architects, held in the archives of Goulburn’s Bradley Grange. Their measuring was done to the nearest 5 millimetres. Analysis of the measurements can be found in M. O’Halloran, Remembering ‘The First Time’. Francis Howard Greenway at Work in Australia, Goulburn (GBPublishers)2006 ISBN 0-9581262-5-9. The study of measurements of buildings is not a popular pastime; moreover, it is fraught with difficulty. Measured drawings of built works are often done, but rarely studied in their own right. Accurate measured drawings allow reconstruction in the event of calamity; but they also are an indispensable resource for research. Plans and Elevations and Specifications provided by the original authors are especially valuable; but what do they mean? Even when buildings survive together with their original documented Plans and Elevations, it is sometimes difficult to reconcile the documentary record with the built work; quite apart from the various commentary about it. It becomes a matter of correctly interpreting the measurements. Measuring assists in delineating the physical features of built fabric. All buildings have flaws and irregularities that speak of their heritage of circumstance. How does one determine whether a particular measurement describes such heritage of circumstance or whether it is part of the originator’s intent? This commentary, focussed on just two examples within the portfolio of Greenway design, assumes that there is some specific intent that otherwise pervades, over-riding the particularities. What might be such? Common themes in design at Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK & Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE: Each flow from and are designed to give tangible physical expression to Isaac Newton’s research of standards of measurement, devoted to providing rationale for introduction of a metric standard of measurement. Each design has the passage of time as its principal referent. Each illustrates the conviction that architecture entails definition of ‘place’. The geographical co-ordinates of this place are recorded in masonry as identifiable lengths in each. The geographical co-ordinates of Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK determine the disposition of buildings and allocation of industrial processes at Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE. Each underlines the importance of Egyptian and Mesopotamian themes as fundamental informants of western culture. Each is designed in the ancient protocol of cubits and feet. Each incorporates historical references that show extraordinary sensitivity to the clients’ background and interests. The scientific sophistication of the designer (attested to by Macquarie) In a Despatch to Earl Bathurst, 24th March, 1819: “In consequence of Mr Greenway’s Scientific Skills, Judgment and Superior Taste, the Government Buildings Erected by him are not only Strong, durable and Substantial, but also Elegant and good Models of Architecture.” Macquarie’s Despatches 1819, A1192 p.189. is evident from the many instances in each where reference is made to work by Newton, Napier, Greaves, etc. Each design features a Code of Copyright and a signature cipher of authorship, derived from Isaac Newton and John Napier. Each design is focussed on transformation: on Newton’s fascination with phenomena, as passage into light. In general: In referring the Greenway legacy and Greenway design, I am unable to distinguish the contributions made by Mary Greenway (nee Moore) and by her husband Francis Howard Greenway. I am minded that a researcher for historian Sue Rosen recounts a memory of Valerie Ross (1932-2009), genealogical writer about Hawkesbury River settlement, to the effect that Mary Greenway applied to come to NSW to join Francis "because she was the person who drew her husband's plans!!"(letter from P.C. McIntyre dated 30th March 1999). Hence, I consider that since there is insufficient information to distinguish them, I want it to be understood that both are included in the commentary. There are some preliminary issues that you should be aware of; (See before Reading more here) The Notes presented here in the main text are supplemented by other material that can enable further exploration of the issues, as desired; by pressing on the rubric here. That supplementary material can provide useful background for analysis of other Greenway designs. The Notes are far from being a comprehensive appreciation of the Greenway architecture exhibited in Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK and Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE designs. Starting with HYDE PARK BARRACK and noting parallels at Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE, I invite you to consider just seven aspects: The co-ordinates of geographical location The Egyptian flavour of design The Clock Some features of the brick walls The pavement in front of the Dormitory The glass window panes The internal roof structures Then, after some general remarks about Proportion, consider the bricks themselves, and the stone string courses. I hope you enjoy this comparative excursus into the wonderful world of Greenway design, and that it stimulates further inquiry.  Some Background Much scholarly endeavour was expended in England during renaissance times in determining the provenance and accurate measurement of English standards of measurement. (See before British Imperial here) The fruit of that endeavour survives in England’s architectural endowment and is celebrated in the antipodes through the Greenway legacy. Similar scholarly interest in the provenance of local standards of measurement was evident throughout Europe, stimulated by a quest to settle upon a uniformly applicable and geodetically based universal standard of measurement, dubbed metro cattolico, or ‘universal metre’. (See metro cattolico here) Frequent reference will be made to the works of John Greaves and Isaac Newton: (See John Greaves here) (See Newton & Jones here) There were many other writers and researchers in the field, but the work of Greaves and Newton is probably more accessible today, and certainly captured the public attention at the time. Australia’s BRADLEY GRANGE is the embodiment – the physical expression in masonry and timber – of Isaac Newton’s contribution to debate about the introduction of a geodetically based metric system of measurement. Analysis of the Greenway-designed steam-powered industrial complex that is Australia’s BRADLEY GRANGE enables interpretation of Newton’s written but somewhat cryptic text. Written in latin by Isaac Newton, of uncertain date, in various drafts gathered under the title De magnitudine cubiti sacri…, it appeared in english translation for the first time in 1737, appended to an edition of Collected Works of John Greaves, as “A DISSERTATION Upon the Sacred Cubit of the Jews and the Cubits of the several Nations; in which, from the Dimensions of the greatest Egyptian Pyramid, as taken by Mr. John Greaves, the antient Cubit of Memphis is determined”. It was published in the Miscellaneous Works of John Greaves, Professor of Astronomy in the University of Oxford, ed. Thomas Birch, (London, 1737), pp.405-433. Available on line at http://www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.uk/view/texts/normalize… As the title suggests, Newton’s work was based on Greaves’ book Pyramidographia, or a Description of the Pyramids in Ægypt, published in 1646. The text of Newton’s Dissertation, together with the antipodean built form, contributes to understanding the choice of measurements used in all genuine Greenway-designed buildings. The objective of Newton and Greaves is to show the essential integrity and harmony of standards of measurement across the ages and across the nations and peoples. In the process, they assert the antiquity and stability of standards of measurement. Both Newton and Greaves intend to cut across the nomenclature based upon national usage; presenting the foundations for a truly catholic or universal metric measure. Newton’s Dissertation Upon the Sacred Cubit of the Jews and the Cubits of the Several Nations… is a brilliant example of that intent. (See Newton’s Dissertation here) Newton explores the ancient provenance of english standards of measurement and affirms with precision the deficiency of the french standards; the deficiency that disqualifies the french metre from being accepted as the truly geodetic basis for a universal standard of measurement. Newton’s principal interest is the relationship between the arcane cubit of the ancient egyptians, which he equates to the Cubit of Moses or ‘sacred Cubit of the Jews’, and the Cubit of Memphis, which was the measurement standard when Memphis was the capital of Egypt (as distinct from other times when the capital was at Thebes, for example). Such is no mere antiquarian interest. Those cubits relate to the fundamentals of his mathematical principles of natural philosophy. They are the magnitudes adopted as standard measures in the ancient world to supply values that unequivocally offer adequate approximation to the definite proportions required for ‘quantity of matter’ and ‘quantity of motion’ to have meaning. The proportionality they express is that of space and time; that of The Same and The Different in Plato’s physics. Measuring is fundamental to the business of determining quantity and of assigning number; such is the stuff of the physical sciences. Each of the definitions with which Newton begins his famous Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy is expressed specifically and deliberately as mensura, ‘a measuring’. Measuring requires an agreed canon of standards for it to be meaningful; and such standards have to be consonant with the physical world that they are intended to explain. Newton’s Dissertation is crafted to address such requirement. Among such standards is the Etruscan foot and cubit. The ancient Etruscan foot is the fundament of the Tuscan Order of architecture. It was studied extensively by Leo Baptista Albertus (in the vernacular, Leon Battista Alberti) whose work promoted its importance as the key towards proper appreciation of vernacular architecture. (See Greenway here) It became in turn the focus for English renaissance architect Inigo Jones’ study of Stonehenge, (See Newton & Jones here) making it the central feature of his design of the church of St Paul at Covent Garden in London. (See Covent Garden Church here) Australian Greenway usage of the etruscan foot is to be taken as reference to and celebration of such historical precedent. Etruscan foot of 0.35714…m relates to Roman foot of 0.2976…m in the ratio 12:10 or 6: 5. It is also relevant to note that the reciprocal of 2.8 is 0.357143857….; and that 0.28m2 is the square of one example of Newton’s Cubit of Memphis. Etruscan foot is one of many classic standards of measurement referred in the Greenway portfolio which demonstrates that ancient standards of measurement reflect fundamental physical data and embody a sophisticated understanding of the natural world. Etruscan foot is singled out here because of its relevance to this comparative exercise about Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK and GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE, in that the Site Plan of Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE is founded on a foursquare of 100 etruscan feet, or a square of 100 etruscan cubits; and in that 100 etruscan feet will be found in companion measurements and ratios at HYDE PARK BARRACK. Etruscan civilisation is known to be very old, flourishing in the Hindu Kush, originating in Egypt. By that I mean that Etruscan standard is the ‘natural’ or generated version of the Egyptian standard. The remainder of these Essays into Architecture is dedicated to explore the implications of this for an understanding of Greenway architectural practice and its historical architectural precedents. For the moment, the following must suffice: ancient standard measures of length relate to one another as 25:24; in the septenary system of Egyptian measures, cubits relate to feet as 28:16. Accordingly, Etruscan and Egyptian standards are related in the following fashion: 0.35714285m ÷ 25x24 = 0.342857142m; 0.342857142m x 28÷16 = 0.600m = 0.300m x 2. * Australia’s Bradley Grange Standing on the bluff of the long low hill that is Lansdowne, overlooking the spot where Governor Macquarie and his party camped during their journey of discovery in October 1820, the long reach of the Mulwaree Chain of Ponds glistens in the light. In his diary, Lachlan Macquarie records the scene: “… we reached the north-west boundary of Goulburn Plains… Here we halted at a quarter past four p.m. and pitched our camp in a noble, rich meadow, near a fine large pond of fresh water, the cattle being up to their bellies in as fine, long sweet grass as ever I saw anywhere. The distance from where we last crossed the Wollondilly is about four miles to our present camp, making this day’s journey about sixteen miles and by far the most disagreeable stage we have come, but the grandeur, beauty and richness, independent of the usefulness of the country we are now in, sufficiently compensates for all the labour and toils of this long day’s journey.” (Diary 22 October 1820) Jonas Bradley began building his hardwood weatherboard home on Lansdowne in 1822. His younger son, William, married in 1831, building and occupying a townhouse that is now Goulburn’s Tattersall’s Hotel. When, in 1839, Lady Jane Franklin was entertained there by Emily Elizabeth Bradley, she noted the portrait above the mantle of the fireplace of Emily’s father, William Hilton Hovell, issue of an extraordinary Viking-Norman ancestry. Jane was daughter of Jeanne Guillemard whose grandfather Jean was part of the Huguenot refugee enclave in London who had fled the wars and massacre prosecuted by the Duke of Anjou before and after he became Henry III of France. Jane and Emily shared a heritage of oppression. In effect, in undertaking her ‘overland journey from Port Phillip to Sydney’ in 1839, Jane Franklin was retracing – from the other end - the expedition of discovery undertaken by Hovell with Hume in 1824. Emily’s husband was away from home when she arrived. Returning next day, William Bradley escorted Lady Franklin on a tour of his Steam Mills at the Grange, on the other side of the river from the family’s Lansdowne headquarters, admiring the workmanship of its builder, Frank Lawliss, recruited from retirement on his property near Yass. Mary Moore and Francis Howard Greenway had no need of a portrait as introduction to Captain Hovell. The Greenways and Hovells were contemporary colonial residents. Esther Arndell and William Hilton Hovell and their two children arrived in Sydney in 1813 with John Dickson and his apprentices Peter Stuckey and Thomas Barker, bringing with them to the antipodes the first steam engines. Some 3 months later Francis Howard Greenway arrived, to be joined 5 months later by his wife Mary Moore and their children. It is not clear when the Greenways visited Lansdowne to discuss the design of the Bradleys’ Grange; like the author of Shakespeare’s play The Merchant of Venice, they had to have been there. Probably, it was in 1832. Emily and William married in 1831, in the church that Frank Lawliss had built in Campbelltown. Mary Moore-Greenway died in 1832. William’s older brother Thomas died in 1834. The family already owned some 4,000 acres of land on the eastern side of the Chain of Ponds, granted in 1822, formally gazetted in 1831. The land on which the Grange is built was not purchased by William Bradley until 1833. The design of the steam-powered industrial complex that is the Bradley Grange is situation-specific, leaving no doubt that the selection of the site – and consequent necessary purchase - was an architectural imperative. With remarkable sensitivity to the heritage of their client, the authors of design for Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE have selected two of Shakespeare's plays for their inspiration: The Merchant of Venice and The Tragedy of Hamlet. The hero in The Merchant of Venice is Portia. Portia’s house, Belmont, 10 miles from Venice, on the bank of Brenta Canal, is the Villa Foscari, designed by Palladio for the jewish brothers Alvise & Nicolo Foscari, whose ancestor Francesco Foscari was Doge of Venice; whose travails at the hands of the Council of Ten were dramatized by Byron in his Historical Tragedy in 5 Acts: The Two Foscari, published in 1821, and composed by Giuseppe Verdi as the opera I Due Foscari, which was playing in London in Her Majesty’s at Covent Garden when Emily visited in 1847. The action of the play is set within the context of the historical ‘royal’ progress of Henry, then Duke of Anjou, later Henry III of France, hosted, at great expense, by the Foscari brothers. Emily Elizabeth Hovell’s grandmother was Francesca Isabella Foscari, the Italian jewish singer, mistress of First Fleet pioneer Thomas Arndell, descended from a long line of malters and maltsters. Emily’s father, the explorer and seafarer Captain William Hilton Hovell, descended from the de Hauteville family, of enterprising Viking lineage, who settled at Yarmouth when the Normans invaded England. With exquisite irony, the English have exacted their revenge upon the Normans by translating the ‘important town’ that is haute-ville into a hovel. Nonetheless, the Captain still pronounced his name hoe-veal, as is evident from an entry in architect John Verge’s Order Book. The Viking heritage of Emily’s portraited father, would have been accentuated by the presence of an intimate of the Bradley family: the Dane, Severin Kanute Salting, their mercantile agent. (See Hovell & Bradley here) Encapsulating a host of Renaissance references under the rubric of The Merchant of Venice, much more ancient provenance is portrayed in the selection of Shakespeare’s The Tragedy of Hamlet for the principal theme of design of the Goulburn Steam Mills. Set in Denmark, Shakespeare's Hamlet can be traced back to the story of Amlohdi and from there to the Viking tale of Grotte's Mill. The counterpart of Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark, in scandanavian myth was Amlodhi, the owner of a magnificent Mill. Initially grinding out peace and plenty, later, in decaying days, grinding out only salt. Now, at the bottom of the sea, it grinds rock and sand, and has created a vast whirlpool, the Maelstrom, which leads to the land of the dead. The theme leads to consideration of Egyptian and its derivative Greek mythology and architectural practice. The steam-powered industrial complex that is Bradley Grange is situated on the western side of the river, the traditional realm of the dead, designed to be approached by water from Lansdowne on the eastern side, the ferryman tying up to a jetty, projecting above the deepest pond, next to which is an underwater tunnel, discharging the passengers – the heroes (tourists who will make the return journey), on to the jetty, and the recently deceased directly into the underwater tunnel and on into the bowels of the steam-driven Maudslay Beam Engine driving the various Mills, grinding slowly but grinding exceedingly small; contained within a housing bound by a sandstone ligature shaped as a cavetto moulding, in the typical egyptian fashion, a scotia, containing the mote like souls of the dead. (See Cavetto moulding and scotia here) (See Passage into Light here) Observing the jetty from within, through the only other sandstone feature in the complex (apart from the foundations) is mummified Osiris, that desiccated dried-up old prune of egyptian mythology, standing on the iron-mesh floor of the drying kiln. The story of the myth and legend is about the frame of time, astronomical time; the time of planets and stars precessing, halting and recessing in an aeonic cycle of growth and decay, portraying the shifting of celestial framework. The architects had already embarked on a discursus about time in their design of the Hyde Park Barrack. That commission provided them with their “first opportunity to plan in the grand manner”, as architectural historian Morton Herman styles it. Here, at Goulburn, they found their last opportunity to plan in the grand manner, focussing on the cosmic time that forms The Frame of the Whole. Before the year was out, Mary was dead. In another 18 months, so was Thomas Bradley, bringing about a pause in the construction of the complex, until William Shelley injected more capital into a new partnership: Bradley & Shelley, Millers & Brewers. By then, Francis Howard Greenway was dead. I saw Eternity the other night, Like a great ring of pure and endless light, All calm, as it was bright, And round beneath it, Time in hours, days, years Driv'n by the spheres Like a vast shadow mov'd; in which the world And all her train were hurl'd. “The World” by Henry Vaughan Newton’s contemporary, the welsh poet Henry Vaughan (1622-1695) commanded Newton’s attention also because of his work A Discourse of Coin and Coinage: The first Invention, Use, Matter, Forms, Proportions and Differences, ancient & modern: with the Advantages and Disadvantages of the Rise and Fall thereof, in our own or Neighbouring Nations: and the Reasons. Together with a short Account of our Common Law therein. (1675) The design of Australia’s Bradley Grange presents an architectural portal into the ancient world of time immemorial. Whereas the HYDE PARK BARRACK is essentially a residential complex, designed for a rectangular site with a longside of 300 feet, BRADLEY GRANGE is an industrial complex designed for a foursquare site with sides of 200 etruscan feet (35.714metres x 2) or 100 etruscan cubits overall. In deference to the Foscari heritage, and in homage to renaissance architect Andrea Palladio who designed villa Foscari, the central east-west axis of the built complex is given the dimension of 100 venetian feet (34.76metres); having determined that this ‘place’ is to be situated at latitude 34.76oS at the midpoint of the foursquare. Maintaining the ancient theme, the configuration of built forms and their intervening spaces at BRADLEY GRANGE presents as a pattern of cubits. That pattern assumes a division of 80 bulk linear parts for the site (‘bulk’ in Plato’s sense of ogkos, being a three-dimensional unit: 1 x 1 x 1); in a grid of 40 x 40 x 4 such. For design purposes, any value (number) can be assigned to the unit side(s) of such bulk. Each linear bulk-part for the BRADLEY GRANGE design quite deliberately expresses the ratio of geographical co-ordinates for the HYDE PARK BARRACK site. The various industrial functions are grouped and co-ordinated according to such ratios. The actual dimensions of the built forms that house these functions express the architects’ interest in the architectural and archaeological work of Isaac Newton and Inigo Jones and John Greaves. A panoply of ancient standards of measurement are marked out with precision as 100 such standard units in bricks and stone blocks in the built forms of BRADLEY GRANGE. Because of that precision in expression, it becomes possible to interpret the measurements of other exemplars in the Greenway portfolio, such as those of the HYDE PARK BARRACK. Suspended above them all, on the Goulburn Steam Mills, are Isaac Newton’s calculated measures of time. (See Newton & Jones here) (See John Greaves here) Both designs are distinctively Egyptian in theme, with Danish flavour. That being so, consider the designs under the title: The Frame of Time: First & Last Ratios of Greenway Architectural Practice in Antipodes  © North of England Civic Trust, 2019  Cultura Trust, The Rivergreen Centre, St Mary’s Lane, St Mary’s Park, Morpeth, NE61 6BL When ready for grinding, two millstones were positioned one on top of the other. The stone on the bottom is called the bedstone and is stationary, while the one on top called the runner rotates over it. To begin the process, grain was fed into the hole in the middle of runner. As the runner turned, the grain would be cut by the scissoring action of the carved grooved patterns along both stones. When the runner stone rotated just above the bedstone – never touching – the grain would repeatedly get ground between the grooves as it worked its way from the centre to the outer ring of the millstone. The centre of the bed stone and runner would be approx. 1/8th inch apart but towards the outer edge of the millstones, the distance was closer to one thousandths of an inch.  Both perfectly balanced – quite a task manoeuvering a 1500lb stone!  Every year these stones were redressed to maintain their effectiveness.  Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK As we approach Macquarie Street from Hyde Park, we are immediately confronted by an Egyptian theme. Flanking the processional way of Macquarie Street, Sydney, is the double cartouche of the british Governor, Lachlan Macquarie Esq. In the egyptian fashion, but crafted in the popular Danish shape, the twin cartouche represents the two halves of the royal man: the two feet of the pharaoh, encased in measuring cords. The deliberate placement, on the front facades of the Hyde Park Barrack and St James Church, is both the architect’s salute to his patron, the colonial governor, and a memorial about the governor’s responsibility to the people: to be the embodiment and guarantor of what the ancient egyptians called maat: personifying truth, justice, and the essential harmony of the universe. Such declares the architectural ethos of the precinct. It proves to be much more than a respectful nod in the direction of ancient precedent; the ethos pervades. Lachlan Macquarie was well versed in Egypt and its antiquities. (See Macquarie here) British society generally was besotted with Egyptian fashion. This was the period during which scholars were attempting to digest the vast material emanating from the savants who accompanied Napoleon on his expedition into Egypt; an event of much excitement, and consequence, during Greenway’s later youth. There has always been an underlying fascination with Egypt permeating western civilisation; nonetheless, as James Stevens Curl states, “Ancient-Egyptian religion, art and architecture have profoundly affected Graeco-Roman and Christian civilisations in ways that, to a very great extent, have been ignored by historians and commentators…” J.S. Curl, Egyptomania. The Egyptian Revival: a Recurring Theme in the History of Taste, Manchester University Press 1994 p.xix. The Macquarie – Greenway partnerships had already produced two works with Egyptian theme: the Macquarie Tower on the South Head of Port Jackson, and its Light, echoing in its dimensions the Pharos at Alexandria, in an enclosure bound by ancient measures and masonic symbolism; and the Obelisk in Macquarie Place as the 0 point for measuring distances in the Colony: the architects’ architectural manifesto. Neither the Macquaries nor the Greenways were going to ignore the influence of ‘Ancient-Egyptian religion, art and architecture’. Here, in another ancient land, it will form the explicit foundation of a new humane and wondrous society. (See John Howard and prison reform, in Greenway here) Nor can we ignore the influence of ‘Ancient-Egyptian religion, art and architecture’, if we are to come to grips with our Greenway architectural endowment. (See Cubits & Feet & Fingers here) As we begin this comparative exercise, reflect upon a couple of curious items from the historical record about HYDE PARK BARRACK: Note Macquarie’s Diary entry of 20/5/1819: “as a beginning and experiment – 130 convicts were lodged and Slept for the first time tonight in the New Convict Barrack” (ML A774, p.45); cf. the masonic interests shared by Macquarie and Greenway: (See Masonic membership here) Sydney Gazette’s architectural correspondent at the time (17th July, 1819) says “On the right of the entrance, and of the height only of the enclosing wall, stands a range of offices 300 feet in length…”; and in the Bigge Report into the Macquarie administration it is affirmed that the central Dormitory is 130 feet long and 50 feet wide. None of that “range of offices” remain, but the Dormitory survives intact, now unencumbered by other structures, and can be measured relatively easily; but only some one third of the enclosing buildings remain: part of the Macquarie Street frontage including the entrance lodges and one confinement Cell at the north-west end of the still extant northern ‘range of offices’. Subsequent alterations make measuring more difficult and interpretation more problematic. Nonetheless, there is ample material at hand to help resolve puzzles and confront new conundrums; awaiting your own measuring and analysis. For example, is the complex really 300’ in length? Is the Dormitory really 130 feet long and 50 feet wide? But, where are we? That is the first measurement to make. The site of BRADLEY GRANGE is centred on latitude 34.76oS, determining or determined by a unit length of 100 venetian feet, extending 34.76m, set in masonry as the south side length of the Goulburn Steam Mills; reflecting ancient appreciation of the radius of Moon as 3476km, and where Sun’s 11.11year cycle is reflected on the east side expanse of the Steam Mills. The precise location of HYDE PARK BARRACK is given as the point of conjunction between longitude 151o 12’ 27.00” E and latitude 33o 52’ 5.99” S of that place; that is, 151.2075oE and 33.86832986oS. These are the GPS DMS co-ordinates and GPS DM co-ordinates respectively for HYDE PARK BARRACK, but without indication as to where precisely on site the readings were taken. The Mint building, next door, for example is given as latitude 33.8690oS. You will find that each Greenway design is an expression of architecture as the definition of ‘place’. The co-ordinates of geographical place are incorporated in each design as units of length. Greenway architecture can truly be described as environmental architecture. (See Definition of Place here) Determination of position and ‘place’ is relevant for this comparative exercise because the geographical co-ordinates of HYDE PARK BARRACK determine the Plan of Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE. Unit divisors of Etruscan foot, 357.14285 ÷ 40, tie the HYDE PARK BARRACK site to the configuration of buildings and industrial processes on Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE site. The ratio Longitude 151.207o ÷ latitude 33.86833o = 4.4645558304; which x 80 = 357.1646643; noting that one Etruscan foot = 357.14285mm. The full import of that observation awaits the further elaboration of the HYDE PARK BARRACK design. In the meantime, note that 64 of Newton’s 0.5292m Cubit of Memphis cover 33.8688m. With such figure as degrees of latitude, the equation becomes 151.2 ÷ 33.8688 x 80 = 357.1428571; that is, as metres, 1000 etruscan feet. At the HYDE PARK BARRACK, a length of 100 such Etruscan feet, or 35.7m embraces the North roofed edge of the Cell and the North edge of the South small gate. 35.7…m locates the North wall of the South Lodge in relation to the North wall of the complex (100 etruscan feet). 35.7m takes one from inside West wall of Cell to inside East wall of Superintendent’s Cottage (100 etruscan feet). 35.7m ÷ 2 marks the 17.85m (50 feet) height of the Dormitory from floor to top of fleche. Similarly, the geographical co-ordinates are given dimensional expression in the built work. Thus, 15.12m marks the height from floor to inner peak of pediment on the Dormitory’s West Elevation, reflecting Longitude 151.2oE. Latitude 33.86…oS is reflected as 33.86m from North wall of the complex to capping edge of South Main Gate Post (and the inverse may have been the case from the demolished South wall, such that the Latitude serves to fix the positions of the Main Gate Posts). The positions of the open Main Gates seem similarly to be determined, since 30.24m (15.12m x 2) marks the length from the North open Main Gate to the North wall of the North Cell. Also, reflecting Latitude, centre of Main Gates to South roofed edge of South Lodge is 33.868m ÷ 4 = 8.467m. * Having considered where we are in relation to place and space, where are we in relation to time? Position yourself at the spot where the architectural correspondent of the Sydney Gazette stood in 1819: “The aspect of the building is beautiful at a distance, but at a near approach conveys an idea of towering grandeur. At the entrance gate is erected a lodge on each side, for the porter and the mustering clerk; and upon entering, the whole range of buildings breaks upon the coup-d’oeil. …Opposite the entrance gate, four pilasters … supporting a pediment where the roof ends. In the tympanum is placed a very handsome clock, made here, which does much credit to the maker.” Consider the Clock. The central building is a Dormitory. It is the only Greenway building designed to have a clock on it. The Clock is the main feature of the design. The Clock explains the rationale of the design. The Clock integrates all the elements of design. Certain observations can be made from running a rule over the drawing of Elevation of the west façade that houses the Clock. Confirmation awaits the independent data from the Site Notes from which the Drawings are made. ‘The archivist’ comments: “Sadly I was not able to access the clock intimately either and have used a photo taken by Lynn Collins who worked for HHT to scale all of the elements of the pediments including the clock. I did gain access to the inside of the belfry so the accuracy there is more known. I mentioned to SLM that it would be prudent to have areas that were not able to be accessed at the time of survey, earmarked for survey when maintenance scaffolding was next in place. Additionally I should have/be showing those zones where direct access was not made possible and a degree of future surveying is required to remove any conjecture.” Recall Macquarie’s underlined Diary entry of 20/5/1819, “as a beginning and experiment – 130 convicts were lodged and Slept for the first time tonight in the New Convict Barrack”; which can be taken to indicate the relevance of 130 units for the design. As it proves to be, after considering the measurements. The number 26.0 or 2 x 13.0 appears prominently in the architectonics of renaissance humanism, and especially in the architectural practice of Leon Battista Alberti, who, like Greenway, changed his name, adding Leo to his baptismal name, Baptista Albertus, allowing construction of a cipher that could be imprinted on designs as an identifier of authorship, as part of a copyright protection device. (See Code of Copyright here) The extensive use of the figure 130 throughout the HYDE PARK BARRACK design and the imprint of his own name-cipher on Greenway designs is to be taken as reference and homage to Alberti. Face and hands of the original clock still grace the front elevation of the Dormitory. Clock centre is 13.0m above floor level. The line for inscription within the Danish styled cartouche which houses the clock is also positioned according to Macquarie’s number, being 1.30m from Clock centre. Clock is housed in a series of concentric rings, the 1st being 12.45m from floor; x  = 39.1…m, reflecting length of Dormitory roof between barge boards of the pediments; and 12.65m from ground, being 25 barley cubits of 0.50625m, or 50 such feet. This serves to remind us that ancient standards of measurement were derived for purposes of apportioning and allocating quantities of foodstuff, among which grain is an important component. Barley grain is one such staple of diet. The Clock’s reference here can be taken as reference to the time of vegetative growth cycle that is celebrated in the Osiris myth: the theme embodied in the Goulburn Maltings at BRADLEY GRANGE. the 2nd 12.4m from floor level, ticking 1,000 inches of the roman scientific foot as it tolls the double round of 12 hours: 12.4m. = 0.2976m ÷ 24 x 1,000; and 12.6m from ground, referring the longitude of this place: 12.6m x 12 = 151.2m. the 3rd 12.3m, referring the beginning of Plato’s Timaeus dialogue: 1,2,3 … with its emphasis on cosmic time, and the greek understanding of number. the 4th 12.24m from floor, x  = 39.2, giving full roofed length of Dormitory. Each ring has its own dimensional significance as diameter describing curvature: 1st 1.48m is 5 roman feet and x  = 9.30m ÷ 2, referring 930mm width of brick piers; 2nd 1.3825m presents as 12.5 venetian feet, used by Palladio as his standard for publication, and secured as the 34.76oS latitude of, and the 100 feet or 34.76m length of the Steam Mills at, Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE: 1.3825 x 22/7 = 0.3476 x 12.5. 3rd. 1.2m x  = 3.7735…m or reciprocal of 0.265m which x 2 is the length of Newton’s Cubit of Memphis, referred above. 4th 1.05m x m, indicating length of 2 english rods as 2 x 16.5 english feet; noting that roofed width of Dormitory is 16.5m. The ‘place’ of the clock is relevant. There the universe is centred; there the world turns, pivoting on a point determined by the celestial co-ordinates of Latitude 33.8688oS and Longitude 151.2oE. Those co-ordinates tell the shape of turning Earth, expressing and dividing in their ratio the distance from ‘this’ centre that the light of any star will appear on the horizon as Earth turns: 151.2 ÷ 33.8688 = 4.464285714, which x 80 = 357.1428571. Light disappears on the horizon, or appears, at a distance of 3,570m from an observer whose eye is positioned 1m from surface. Such distance is recognized in ancient metrology as 1,000 ancient Etruscan feet, each of which extends 0.35714285m (50 units of 0.357m comprise the height of the Dormitory at Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK: 0.357 x 50 = 17.85m). On that basis, passage of stellar light can be tracked along Earth’s horizon, allowing the measure of sidereal time, which is 462m per second. Such is the time of the vault of heaven; set in masonry as the 4.62m walled height of the central buildings at Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE, designed on a foursquare of units of 100 etruscan feet. Tying together these ‘places’, Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK, and Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE, with the precision noted above, means that Latitude (of the Barrack) is set at 33.8688oS; noting that 64 of Newton’s Cubits of Memphis extend 33.8688m. Such length is redolent of myriad ancient references in conjunction; as seen in the more detailed discussion about the sizes of the window panes in both complexes. (See Glazed windows here) The Measure of Time The Clock is meant to tell time, in more ways than one. The Clock tells that time is a number. What number? So far as the design of HYDE PARK BARRACK is concerned, the primary number of time is the transcendental number, e. The simple clock is a much more sophisticated device than is commonly realised. HYDE PARK BARRACK’s design gives the measurement of time in its dimensions, designed for convicts ‘doing time’ by a convicted architect who knows all about ‘doing time’. By way of explanation: The design of HYDE PARK BARRACK, begun in earnest around August of 1816, marks the 200th anniversary of the death of John Napier (April 4th, 1617), whose pioneering work on logarithms is celebrated throughout. Construction of the Barrack was complete in 1819, in time to mark the 200th anniversary of the publication of Napier’s Mirifici Logarithmorum Canonis Constructio. Napier’s work was taken up enthusiastically by the scholars at Gresham College, the institution that has had such profound influence on the australian continent. (See Gresham College here) Napier’s logarithm tables were refined by mathematician Henry Briggs who was the first occupier of the Gresham chair in geometry, and in 1620, holder of the first Savilian Professorship of Geometry at Oxford. Out of John Napier’s investigation of logarithms arose the concept of e, arising in turn from consideration of the qualities of hyperbolas. e is now regarded as one of the six fundamental constants of mathematics: e, i,  -1. 0. +1. It was swiss mathematician Leonhard Euler who gave the constant the nomenclature of e in 1747 and in consequence it is now known as Euler’s Number. However, Isaac Newton calculated the value of e much earlier than that. It is Newton’s method that is referred in the Greenway designs. Newton calculated the value of e by means of factorial analysis, arriving at e – 1, that is 1.7182818… as the value; which is represented in the space between the South wall of the North Range of Offices and the North facing pilasters/piers of the Dormitory, spanning 10e metres or 17.18m. Reinforcing the theme of ‘doing time’, the Confinement Cell at the NW corner paces out 2 x 2.718m along its EW axis internally. Height of the boundary wall along Macquarie St, at its external junction with the North wall of the North Lodge is 2.718m. But, in what sense can e be recognised as the Measure of Time? In the first instance, e determines the order of the natural numbers that the Clock tells: why 2 is followed by 3, and 3 by 4, etc. Otherwise, e describes the processes of growth and decay: the terms or end-points of movement. Extensive use of e and its counterpart, the natural logarithm, is found throughout Greenway designs. In general, e expresses the rate of change; the natural logarithm describes how long the change will take. The issues are about time, telling about movement / alteration / change. The deliberate placement of a Clock on HYDE PARK BARRACK focuses attention on movement and the numbering of which is time. That is what the HYDE PARK BARRACK Clock is about. All the elements of the HYDE PARK BARRACK design lean to the viewpoint that movement essentially is phaenomenon in its quite literal sense: simply a presentation (presencing) of what is; of movement - something coming into light. Such is Newton’s understanding of ‘phenomena’, and his whole body of work is dedicated to exploring ‘something coming into light’: which is the theme pertaining to transformation found in the Greenway portfolio as the legacy of ancient Egypt’s Book about Merging into Light, otherwise known as Book of the Dead. (See Passage into Light here) A host of historical references are embedded in the design of this Clock, not least of which is that 10,000 Etruscan feet trace the physical extent, on revolving globular Earth, of our (human) perception of radiation, which we interpret as light. Given the historical intellectual context, confirmed by the intensity of the BRADLEY GRANGE references, the ratios that the Clock tells are the architects’ affirmation that Newton’s first and last ratios are first and last ratios of movement. (See e and Time & Movement here) Accordingly, the initial question, posed at the commencement of this section of enquiry, namely: ‘Having considered where we are in relation to place and space, where are we in relation to time?’ can be modified to give it its full Newtonian effect: where are we in relation to place and space, and movement and time? As for a parallel with Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE, you might retort that, there is no clock affixed! Or, is there not? At Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE the time(s) being told are threefold, thrice told: the cosmic time of ancient myths dealing with Mills, cf. G. de Santillana & H. von Dechend, Hamlet's Mill: An Essay Investigating the Origins of Human Knowledge and Its Transmission Through Myth, 1969 grinding slowly, back and forth, powered by steam generated by the fires of Hades and tightly housed within a scotia ligature filled with the mote like souls of the dead, delivered by the ferryman at the jetty on the Pond through the water-filled tunnel beneath; the time of vegetative cycle told by the malting process; the time of hydrogen exchange told by the process of fermentation. (See Cavetto Moulding and scotia here) Such, then, is the movement which the Clock on HYDE PARK BARRACK numbers, as does that of the Mills in Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE. The issues have been debated for centuries. If you would like to glimpse some insights into the philosophical underpinnings, (See e & Time & Movement here) There are other contenders than the transcendental number e for the numbering of movement that the Clock tells. Among those is 0; already marked by the Obelisk in Macquarie Place. cf. M. O’Halloran, The Foundations of Ancient Science. Conversations with Francis Howard Greenway about his Obelisk in Macquarie Place Sydney Australia, Goulburn 2002 ISBN 0 9581262 0 8 Architects are known to include elements of design that reference the work of others, indicating a continuity and, often, an ancient provenance. There should be nothing incongruous therefore in the Greenway practice of referring work in other ‘disciplines’. The theory of logarithms has such ancient provenance. Joseph Gwilt, a contemporary of Greenway and fellow exhibitor at the Royal Academy, discusses logarithms in his Encyclopedia of Architecture. In presenting how logarithms work, in the Base 10 system, Gwilt intimates the primal importance of 0 in the number series. (See Joseph Gwilt here) Consider again, the Clock. The conventional mechanical clock does not begin its passage with 1. 1 references and represents past (passed) time. The series begins with 0. There is numerical profundity encapsulated in the ‘simple’ mechanical clock. The clock not only tells the passage of time; it also tells the amplifying (and diminishing) passage of number. Follow the argument, supported by some other measurements of HYDE PARK BARRACK; and consider the relative merits of the various candidates for ‘the number that time tells’: (See e & Time & Movement here) HYDE PARK BARRACK’s design gives the measurement of time in its dimensions, designed for convicts ‘doing time’ by a convicted architect who knows all about ‘doing time’.  A Personal Note Lest there be any ambiguity, who are we talking about as the architect? The year 1777 is known to be the baptismal year, the naming year, of Francis Greenway. Height of the Dormitory from floor to the peak of the pediment appears in the Drawings as 15.4m, or 50 feet, where the relevant foot is the egyptian geographic feet of 0.308m, upon which all ancient measures are based. Precise value of the geographic foot is calculated by metrologist L.C. Stecchini as 307.79567mm, based on his conviction that the foot is the side dimension of a cube that has volume 29,160cc; such that the geographic foot is the cube root of 29,160 units. This is the ancient artaba. More precisely, 50 feet of 0.30779567m amplified by the length 11.55m results in the figure 177.751994m2. 11.55m is the measured height of the Dormitory on the North Elevation from ground to top of the barge boards of the eaved cincture that binds the building. 1.155m is the classic figure, discussed by Joseph Gwilt, for the intercolumniation of the greek Parthenon. The interesting thing about the ratio of 50 geographic feet and the linear intercolumniation of the Parthenon, is that, besides referring Francis Greenway’s naming year of 1777, it may enable calculation of the otherwise unknown birthdate, as year 1777.52, or 7th July, 1777, or 7/7/1777. A signature feature of Greenway authorship, is the imprint of lengths that are factors of 23.706, which arises as the cipher devised, by the ancient technique of gematria, from his change of name to Francis Howard Greenway, designed as a code of copyright in design. (See Greenway here) The diadem of the Crown on the cartouche that houses the Clock is placed in a modular double of 2 x 7.3m above floor of the Dormitory; which is the module of 23.706 egyptian geographic feet of 0.308m, upon which all ancient measures are based. The line upon which Macquarie’s name is inscribed within the cartouche is drawn 23.7m ÷ 2 from floor of the Dormitory. Almost as if: “It might be the Governor’s name inscribed, but it is my name that holds it in its place”. The natural log of the cipher 0.23706... produces the numeric of the copyright code -1.439…; seen as the 14.39…m line of length from ground to the support upon which the crown rests. (See Code of Copyright here) A parallel can be seen in the operational heart of GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE where the Engine Room of the Goulburn Steam Mills has a volume of 177.7m3 and its associated Boiler House has a volume of 237m3. On the Elevation of the measured drawings of the Dormitory, there is a 16.25m height from ground to the barge board under the dome of the central Vent. Ratio of that height and a length along the North Elevation of the Dormitory from the barge board of the East Pediment to the West-facing brick pilaster (and vice versa) is reciprocal of the Greenway name cipher: 16.25m ÷ 38.522…m = 0.4218… = 2.3706-1. That is, Ratio 38.522m ÷ 16.250m = 2.3706. Notice, also that 16.25m introduces the factor 130, not as feet but as metres: 16.25m x 8 = 130m. Such seems to be the rationale of design for the roofed Dormitory. The architect is asserting: this is my design! my name is imprinted on it! my design is to viewed within the context of Newton’s research, outlined in his Dissertation, exploring foundation for a truly geodetic metric measure.  How else might time be measured, apart from the Clock? Having considered the qualities of the mechanical Clock, consider: how else might time be measured, apart from the Clock? The design serves to expand our view towards the cosmic elements featured in the design of Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE; and to some astronomical features of the passage of light. There is the usual rising and setting of Sun and Moon, telling the seasons and the tides. Then there is sidereal time, the light from the so-called fixed stars, falling on rotating Earth, marking out a length of passage which was determined by the ancients to be in unit lengths of 1,000 geographic cubits per second; or 462m per second. Such is the so-called time of rotation of the vault of heaven. At HYDE PARK BARRACK the distance from the inner North wall of the Confinement Cell is 23.1m to the door into the North Lodge (46.2m ÷ 2). Most modern commentators do not accept that the sides of the Great Pyramid average 231m in length, despite the unequivocal testimony of the ancients. This is because the metrological basis of modern measuring via the (French) metre is deficient (as Newton attests). The Greenway design of Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE tackles this issue head on and lays out the parameters for resolution of the discrepancy between ancient and modern measuring. Once that is understood, it becomes possible to appreciate some of the architects’ otherwise curious dimensional measurements in the design of the Dormitory. Cf. M. O’Halloran, Remembering ‘The First Time’. Francis Howard Greenway at Work in Australia, Goulburn(GBPublishers)2006 ISBN 0-9581262-5-9. p.133; and (See Newton’s Dissertation here). At Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE, the walls of the Maltings, Cooperage and Brewery are 4.62m high. Allied to that is the ancient recognition that light disappears on the horizon of rotating Earth at a distance of 10,000 cubits or 3,570m for an observer whose eye is positioned 1m above the surface. Such is the radius of our vision on moving Earth. Such is the physical fundament of the ancient Etruscan foot, which is found prominently at both HYDE PARK BARRACK and BRADLEY GRANGE. Another way of expressing/measuring time is seen in the practice of expressing differences of longitude in terms of units of time: dividing the equator and the parallels into 360 degrees; then, because Earth rotates daily, dividing each degree into 24 hours, each of which comprise 60 minutes etc. Analysis of the window panes at HYDE PARK BARRACK serves to shift the focus onto such astronomical observations. (See Glazed windows here) ….  Standards of Measurement & the Historical Record Each Greenway design presents as an essay on standards of measurement. More specifically, the design allows and presages the physical embodiment of Isaac Newton’s work on the subject, given in his “A DISSERTATION Upon the Sacred Cubit of the Jews and the Cubits of the several Nations; in which, from the Dimensions of the greatest Egyptian Pyramid, as taken by Mr. John Greaves, the antient Cubit of Memphis is determined”. It was published in the Miscellaneous Works of John Greaves, Professor of Astronomy in the University of Oxford, ed. Thomas Birch, (London, 1737), pp.405-433. Available on line at http://www.newtonproject.sussex.ac.uk/view/texts/normalize… That physical embodiment is to be found most comprehensively in Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK and in Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE, with elements appearing in other built exemplars of Greenway design. Looking at some measurements, for Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK, as found noted in the Site Notes upon which the measured drawings were composed: The Clock is housed within the tympanum of a pedimented gable on the west elevation; which leads to consideration of the pediments in the design; and enables further consideration of the historical record that the Dormitory measures 130 feet by 50 feet. It depends from whose feet one is using as the referand. Whose feet? A contentious matter that often causes confusion among modern interpreters of Greenway designs centres upon the dimension of ‘english foot’. British Imperial Standard is usually assumed to be the relevant tool for interpretation of measurements. However, the British Imperial Standard was not enacted into legislation until 1824; whereas our Greenway endowment dates from 1814. The issue can be resolved by attention to the dimensions of the Dormitory at HYDE PARK BARRACK. Various lines on the Plan of Ground Floor of the Dormitory, marking lengths internally between the windows of the East-West axis, indicate lengths of 120 classic English standard feet. Thus: 36.654m indicates 120 english Winchester feet (pes naturales) of 305.45mm; 36.788m indicates 120 english feet of 306mm, identified by Jones & Newton; 36.9354m indicates 120 english feet of 307.79567mm, identified by Newton. And 120 english feet of 304.401mm, as 36.528m, situate the end pilasters on the North face. Another feature to note about these dimensions is that the mid reading between the windows, being 36.788m or 120 english feet of 306mm, identified by Jones & Newton, is a reciprocal expression of the transcendental number e, which is presented as a feature of the whole design dedicated to the memory of John Napier and to the theme of time: (2.7182818 ÷ 100)-1 = 36.7879445. The range of buildings around the perimeter of the complex houses the central Dormitory. Dimensions of the central Dormitory are given in the historical record as 130’ x 50’. But, again, whose feet? And width/length of what are we talking about – that of the stylobate or base? – between the brick piers? – between the brick curtain walls? – between the windows? - between the overhanging eaves? Each has its significance. What can we say about the claim that the Dormitory length is 130 feet? One of the puzzling features of the HPB design is the historical claim that its Dormitory extends 130 feet; without specifying whose feet. Construed as (shorter) Roman feet: 0.2959454m x 130 = 38.472902m. Such length proves to be the length of the stylobate upon which the brick structure is erected: allowing 2 x 2inches of 0.0255m (which are unciae of a foot extending 0.3060m) = 0.102m for corbels of the foundation, and 2 x 0.460m for the brick pilasters/piers, length of built work becomes: 38.472902m – 0.92m – 0.102m = 37.450902m; with a discrepancy of less than 1mm overall from the 37.450m recorded by the archivist. As 130 feet x 0.296m = 38.480m = 37.450m + 0.920m + 0.110m (which is consistent with the practice of overhangs to be multiples of 110mm, and which assumes an inch of 27.5mm from a foot extending 330mm). Measurements from the Site Notes of the Dormitory lengths along the east west axis, between the walls, at ground level, i.e. ignoring the brick pilasters/piers affixed to the walls (in mm): North side: 18310 + 19135 = 37445; South side: 37450. Note the parallel with Palladio’s design of palazzo-villa Almerico (La Rotonda): Palladio’s notation for Hall and porticos: (P.30)2 = (4 x 225 x P.2). Extended, by elaboration of a value for P. as 170 unciae/twelfths: (P.30)2 = (4 x 225) x P.2 = 4 x 225 x (1702 x 122) = 3745,440,000. The brick piers/pilasters add 0.460m to the walled lengths: 37.445m + 0.460m = 37.905m for the north side; 37.450m + 0.460m = 37.910m for the south side. Brick length on the South Elevation is 37.9m on the Drawings. Brick length on the North Elevation is 38m on the Drawings. 162 mortared bricks of 0.235m cover 38.07m. 160 mortared bricks of 0.235m cover 37.60m, (noting that 38.06m – 0.460m = 37.60m). quote Newton An intermediate value of 37.908m presents 130 units of 0.2916m. More precisely, length of the Dormitory, without the roof structure, is 130 feet, including the pilasters/piers, when the foot referred is that upon which the ancient artaba measure is based, founded on the geographic foot of 0.30779567m, the cube of which is 0.02916m3: 130 x 0.2916m = 37.908m which accords well with measured lengths of the Dormitory as 37.910m and 37.905m; and in accord with Newton’s method of limits, in determining an acceptable value for a given standard. A paced length of 14.6m from the pavement in front of the Cell to the North wall of the North Lodge represents 50 of these feet. It might be argued that such units of 0.2916m are not usually recognised as ‘feet’. However, in the Greco-egyptian tradition where cubits are expressions of 28 digits and feet are 16 digits, the pes drusianus, which the Saxons introduced into English measures, is a foot of 0.333…m, and its cubit is 0.333…m ÷ 16 x 28 = 0.58333…m, which, as the Egyptian ‘royal personage’, is 2 feet of 0.29166…m. There is ancient provenance here. It will be found again in the height of the Tower at ‘the new church at Windsor’. The Dormitory building also features stone string courses, extending 38.18m across the bricked lengths, representing 125 english Winchester feet: 125 x 0.30545…m = 38.18…m. Given the measured bricked length of the Dormitory as 37.910m, the stone string course can be seen to add 0.2718m; signifying the temporal number e as a factor in the design: 38.1818…m - 37.910m = 0.2718m. The measured Drawings show the roofed length to be 39.20m on the North Elevation. Given that the overhanging eaves extend 0.880m at each end, the roofed length becomes 37.445m + 1.760m = 39.205m. Roofed length (between the barge boards) presents as 39.1m, which is also of interest in the context of the report of a 130 feet length for the Dormitory: extending 130 feet whose cubit measures a standard 0.5263231m, as Newton identifies: 39.098…m ÷ 130 = 0.300756057m; which x 28 ÷ 16 = 0.5263231. The historical record seems to be quite correct: the bricked length of the Dormitory is indeed 130 feet; and the roofed length (between the barge boards) is also 130 feet. What, then, about the 50 feet width? Measured bricked width of the Dormitory is given in the Site Notes as 15.19m. Recall, the Dormitory is said to be 50 feet wide. However, a foot extending 15.19m ÷ 50 = 0.3038m does not resonate readily. When the reading is taken to be 15.1875m, a host of measurement standards seem to be referred: 30.375m ÷ 2 ÷ 0.300m = 50.625 15.1875m ÷ 0.300m = 50.625, or that number of common Egyptian feet; conversely, 30 barley cubits of 0.50625m extend 15.1875m (cf. Newton’s principle of vegetation). 15.1875 x 0.5555 = 0.23706…-1 x 2 (cf. Newton’s Cubit of Grand Cairo; and the Greenway name cipher). The ancient Karian foot of 0.30375m features in the design of the Macquarie Mausoleum / St Matthew’s church at Windsor. 15.1875 x 0.300 = 9.1125 ÷ 2; once again, reference to Newton is to be found: Among important ancient standards are various ones called qedet. 16,000 qedet weighing 9.1125grams is the basis for the ancient artaba, referred earlier as the cubed version of the geographic foot: 16,000 x 9.1125gms = 291,600gms ÷ 2. The Drusian foot (that north-german basis for the saxon standards of measurement that dominated british measures for so long) seems to be referred in the width of the Dormitory: 9.1125 ÷ 2 x 0.3333…m = 15.1875m; Such qedet of 9.1125gms was the basis for the ‘ounce Tower’ standard for weighing precious metals at the Royal Mint in London (vigorously, even ruthlessly, controlled by Newton). The relevance of such subtlety in measurement might not have been lost on a good number of those who occupied the Dormitory; another illustration of the architect’s extraordinary sensitivity towards the quality of the clientele for whom the Dormitory is designed. Nonetheless, the conjunction of inter-relationships, between so many standards of measurement pertinent to a length of 15.1875 units, does not enable confirmation of a 50 feet width for the Dormitory. The historical record about the site’s dimensions is correct in relation to the 130 feet length. Can the same be said about the reported 50 feet width? Based on the Site Notes measurements, west front of Dormitory is 15.19m: 230 + 5515 + 3695 + 5520 + 230 = 15190 (mm); as is the east front: 230 + 14730 + 230 = 15190 (mm). On the measured drawings, roof width presents as 16.4m; which means that the pediments overlap the walls by 1.21m: 16.4m – 15.19m = 1.21m. Does a width of 16.4m represent an expanse of 50 feet? An entry on the Site Notes from the archivist for measurements of the Main Building (the Dormitory) helps to focus discussion: “225 x 62 = Typical Brick Dimensions”. But, cf. 50 x Vicentine: 14.73m + 1.99m = 50 x 0.3344m, re. overhang. As 16.4…m, the roofed width relates two features: the ancient artaba of 29,160cc and the 225mm length of unit brick, by which the Dormitory is built. The artaba arises from the geographic foot which is said to be the fundament of all ancient standards of measurement: 16.4025m ÷ 0.02916m x 4 = 2250 = 0.225 x 10,000. Can that 16.4…m width of the Dormitory be said to be 50 feet? It seems not. However, it does refer the 130 x 0.2916m length of the Dormitory (37.908m). There is another width to be considered, which is the width of the base, or stylobate, upon which the brick structure is built. The foundation/stylobate on which the brick structure is erected extends 55mm on either side of the west frontage, making that width 15.19m + 0.11m = 15.3m which is 50 feet, if the relevant foot is the 0.306m foot used by Newton in his Dissertation: 0.306m x 50 = 15.3m. The measured Drawings show 15.3m as the length of spread of the stone string courses across the West Elevation; again, 50 feet. So, the historical record again proves to be correct, but perhaps not as one might expect. The Dormitory does measure 130 feet by 50 feet; depending from whose feet are being used as the referand; but any such feet are not those of british imperialists! *  Some other examples: The professional interests of convicted forgers: We have considered the expanse of built brick walls, but the width of the brick fabric itself is interesting in terms of the history of measures, and relates to measures as volumetric bulk units; the classic unit being the pint. Internal width of the ground floor of the Dormitory, between the walls (at the stairwells), is given in the Site Notes as 13.505m. That width is interesting. Width including the walls (i.e. without the external piers) is 14.730m in the Site Notes. The Piers add 0.460m externally, making the overall width 15.190m. This implies that the brick fabric occupies: 15.190m – 13.505m = 1.685m; There is considerable variation in the internal widths at the various levels, awaiting further study. For example, the internal width at ground floor level of 13.505m becomes 13.755m, indicating that the walls step-in, allowing the weight of first floor to be carried on its own skin of brickwork, 0.125m x 2. The same feature is found in the Goulburn Steam Mills at BRADLEY GRANGE. noting that 3.2 cubits of 0.5263231m = 1.68423392m. implying that the free internal width is 13.50576608m. In the egyptian system of standard measures, cubes of any sort are divisible into 64 similar cubic units. The artaba of 29,160cc is one such standard cube, divisible in that fashion. Recall that the length of the Dormitory translates as 130 units of 0.2916m. Such is the provenance of the egyptian cubits (of Memphis) referenced by Newton from Greaves’ measurements of features of the Great Pyramid. Each of such 64 units ranks as a standard egyptian pint, of volume / weight; two of which in conjunction form a module divisible into smaller units, weighing 2 x 4.55625gms or 9.1125 grams; called qedet. Such qedet was used as the standard for weighing precious metals such as gold and silver used as means of exchange. According to Stecchini, it was the standard “common in prehistory or early times”. Loc.cit. p.318. From his research, metrologist Stecchini concludes: “The analysis of the distribution of Egyptian sample weights indicates that there were in use three standards of qedet: 9.000000 grams 9.043945 grams 9.112500 grams. Correspondingly, the study of the monuments and of the measuring rods indicates that there were three values of the royal cubit: 524.1483 millimeters 525.0000 millimeters 526.3231 millimeters.” Loc.cit. p.320 Such qedet is the basis of the ‘ounce Tower’ used to weigh coins at the Royal Mint, housed at the Tower of London in England – the institution that figured so largely in Newton’s life. Such qedet is the origin of the royal cubit identified by Newton, extending 0.5263231m. Roofed length (between the barge boards) presents as 39.1m, which is also of interest in the context of the report of a 130 feet length for the Dormitory: extending 130 feet whose cubit measures a standard 0.5263231m, as Newton identifies: 39.098…m ÷ 130 = 0.300756057m; which x 28 ÷ 16 = 0.5263231. 39.098…m – 1.650m = 37.448m, ‘in the middle’ of the measured 37.450m and 37.445m. 32 of them (i.e. half of a cube’s 64 units) extend 16.8423392m, or the combined width of 10 units of the Dormitory’s 1.685m wide brick fabric. It would seem therefore that the actual size of the bricks used in the construction might be relevant for the analysis. Again, an entry on the Site Notes for measurements of the Main Building (the Dormitory): “225 x 62 = Typical Brick Dimensions”. Note that there are 168.48 bricks of 0.225m in an expanse of 37.908m, which is the recorded length of the Dormitory. Proportionality based on brick dimension is becoming apparent! Internal width of 13.505m presents as that of 60 bricks: 13.505m ÷ 60 = 0.2250…m. The choice of 13.505m for the internal walled width inside the stairwell of the convicts’ Dormitory is unlikely to be accidental. One might speculate that the standard used to weigh coins might not have escaped the attention of a convicted forger! It is richly endowed with historical precedent; and with reminders of personal circumstance. * Consider the full entry on the Site Notes for measurements of the Main Building (the Dormitory): “225 x 62 = Typical Brick Dimensions. 760 = 10 Course Brick Drop”. The volumetric is interesting: 225mm x 62mm x 76mm = 1,060,200mm3, being a cube-volume that has 101.9676945mm as its side lengths, comprising side length of 4 x 25.49192362mm. Such a cube comprises 64 smaller cubes that can be reasonably construed as 64 cubed inches, where the inch is 25.5mm. The volumetric indicated thereby affirms/introduces two features: the ratio 1 ÷ 2.55 that Morten Herman attributes as the key to Greenway success and elegance in design; and reliance upon the work of Isaac Newton in determining the elements of design, insofar as the foot measure that comprises 12 x 25.5mm extends 306mm which is the (shorter) English foot that Newton chooses as his referand for determining the standard length of Roman foot. The issue is important so far as the history / heritage of metrology is concerned; and in determining Newton’s overlooked but rightful place within it. (See metro cattolico here) For further study of the implications: (See Proportion & Design here) * 37.450 = 112 x 0.334375 0.334375 x 3 = 1.003125; cf. Newton’s calculation of the ratio of difference between his research and that of Marin Mersenne about the length of the Cubit of Moses. Relative to the Roman foot, the Cubit of Moses is 25.60 unciae according to Newton and 25.68 unciae according to Mersenne. The ratio of the two is 25.68 ÷ 25.60 = 1.003125. The issue is refined at Goulburn’s Bradley Grange. There, laid out in the Mews, Palladio’s Vicentine represents 25.68301709 ÷ 25.60 = 0.334414285 x 3 = 1.003242855. The figures are applied by Palladio in his work, such as at villa/palazzo Almerico (la Rotonda), as 112 x 0.334414285m = 37.4544m; and at villa Cornaro. Newton’s precedent is being referenced by the Greenways in giving the length of the Dormitory at Hyde Park Barrack as either 37.450m or 37.445m, comprising 130 feet, where the relevant foot presents as either 0.288078923m or 0.288038461m; the average is 0.288057692 x 130. Recall Macquarie’s Diary entry that 130 convicts slept there on the first night (260 feet implanted). The antiquity being referred as piede antiquo is that of Mesopotamia; not that of Rome. This Mesopotamian orientation is consistent with that adopted by Palladio in his design for villa Cornaro. The issue is highlighted at Goulburn where the southern side of the Steam Mills (along the central axis of the site) is built as 100 (Mesopotamian)feet of 0.289m; noting that 0.289m ÷ 1.003242855 = 0.288065844m. Such is the length of the Mesopotamian foot in the ancient metric: 0.288065844m. 130 such = 37.44855975m, ‘in the middle’ of the extant 37.450m and 37.445m lengths of the Dormitory designed by the Greenways for Sydney’s Hyde Park Barrack. Macquarie’s note about 130 is being compounded in the design: 39.098…m ÷ 130 = 0.300756057m; which x 28 ÷ 16 = 0.5263231; cf. Egyptian cubit. 37.44855975m ÷ 130 = 0.288065844m; cf. Mesopotamian foot. 37.908m ÷ 130 = 0.2916m; cf. artabic (Persian) / geographic foot. (0.460+0.460+0.110) + 37.450 = 38.48 = 0.296 x 130; cf. Roman foot. (0.460+0.460+0.110) + 37.442902 = 0.2959454 x 130; cf. Roman foot. So, 130 of the Mesopotamian feet employed in the Greenways’ design of the Goulburn Steam Mills are fundamental elements of their design of the Dormitory at Sydney’s Hyde Park Barrack, touching upon significant historical references/researches by Palladio and by Newton.  We have stood at the gate of HYDE PARK BARRACK appraising the Clock for long enough. There are some items that are small enough and accessible enough that should be easy enough to measure on site. Attend to the Dormitory: depth and breadth of the brick piers / pilasters; and size of window panes; and dimensions of the stone pavement in front of the entrance. Once again, there are puzzles; to be resolved by considering light: illustrating the reciprocity of the passage of light, and of the passage into light that is the stonemason’s legacy; remembering that for generations the Greenway clan had been stonemasons and builders. (See Passage into Light here) * The brick piers introduce the factor 230 and its module 460; and consolidate the reference to e in doing so. 230mm happens to be 9 inches of 25.55…mm, which x 12 = 306.66…mm. 2.55 is the distinctive Greenway proportion noted by Herman; and 25.5mm is the inch of the foot of 306.6mm identified by Newton and Jones. There are further references to Isaac Newton. Newton calculated the value of e by means of a factorial series. Isaac Newton, The Mathematical Papers of Isaac Newton, Vol II 1667-1670 (ed. D.T. Whiteside) Cambridge University Press p.235. In calculating e by a factorial series, Newton arrived at e-1 as the result. The series terminates at 1.71828… and requires that the natural log of e (i.e. +1) be added to give the numerical value of e as 2.71828… Both values are set as diagonal lengths of 27.18…m and 2 x 17.18…m along the Goulburn Steam Mills at BRADLEY GRANGE, superimposed on 100 feet sections of other standards of measurement, marked out explicitly in the fabric of the Mills. Consideration of 230 as the unit or foot of a module or cubit of 460 could be taken as reference to the ‘souls of the dead’, enumerated as ‘4.6012million …’. Particularly so if the Greenway design is meant to emphasise the effect of shadows, as architect Alistair Knox suggests; cf. Australian Regional Building, Chapter 2. (See Shadow here) (See Passage into Light here) Ratio of 460.12 and e -1 is 267.779…, which, as mm, situates the South wall of the North Lodge in relation to the North end wall of the Cell; and the small North gate in relation to the Cell’s inner wall; and which can be construed as the foot of a cubit extending 535.558…mm, being also the cubit that is 306.033…mm x 28 ÷ 16; evoking the extension of the pes Anglicorum or English foot used by Newton as the fundament of his Dissertation upon the Sacred Cubit of the Jews and Other Nations. Newton begins the Dissertation by asserting that Roman foot is 967 of 1000 parts of English foot; which makes English foot 0.30604…m, when Roman foot is the 0.2959454m determined to be such a length by metrologist L.C. Stecchini. (See Newton’s Dissertation here) Translation of the ancient text as enumerating the number of ‘souls of the dead’ disguises the fact that the reference is to calculation of the constituent elements of all substance: the tiny residuals that in the mythic accounts are the objective and outcomes of the milling process, illustrated in the BRADLEY GRANGE design. Additional Newtonian significance of the choice of multiples of 2.30 for this design at Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK is that 2.30 is the square root of 5.29; noting that 0.529…m is the length of Newton’s longest example of Cubit of Memphis, featured in his Dissertation. The square of 4.60 is 21.16 or, as metres, a foursquare of 10 of Newton’s Cubit of Memphis. For further discussion about the implications of such elements of design, cf. M. O’Halloran, The Foundations of Ancient Science. Conversations with Francis Howard Greenway about his Obelisk in Macquarie Place Sydney Australia, Goulburn 2002 ISBN 0 9581262 0 8; pp. 109-141 and 269-277. 21.16m fixes the West faces of the Main Gate Posts in relation to the front doors of the Dormitory. A length of 21.16(BI)” ÷ 2 locates both edges of the North small Gate at the entrance in relation to North Cell walls. The brick piers of the Dormitory are mostly 230mm deep, recessing an additional 120mm to the arched window recesses, and the widths of the piers are mostly 930mm, but they vary, without any seeming uniformity. The variations may prove to be interesting in the overall calculation. The measurements open consideration of more recent historical precedent as to whether the structure presents piers of brickwork, rather than pilasters. The measurements also call attention to more ancient precedent, concerning the curvature of a line and its application within columnar architecture. (See Mathematics of curves here) (See Columns without Walls here) …. Pavement across the west front of the Dormitory Deserves close attention, as an important feature of original design of Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK. Greenway design frequently includes seemingly peripheral elements such as steps, and pumps, as integral elements of design. Such may well be the case here. Here, the pavement serves to situate the design squarely within the context of Newton’s dispute with the French about the measurement of Earth; providing the necessary geodetic information for (re)establishment of a universally applicable metric standard of measurement. (See The stone pavement here) (See Mass of Earth here) The windows The windows and the size(s) of their panes are illuminating. Firstly, count the number of windows in the Dormitory. There are 76; matching the 76 glazed windows in the original extant bulk of Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE. That the windows and their number should be considered in relation to the passage of light seems to be confirmed when one reflects that the Macquarie Lighthouse on South Head was publicised at the time as rising 76 feet. The foundation stone of the built work was laid on 11th July, 1816 and was duly inscribed: This building intended for the double purpose of a light house and barrack is named Macquarie Tower in honour of the founder. The work was commenced in 1816 and completed in 1817 L. Macquarie esq. Governor. This Tower measuring 76 feet in height… Surveyor-General Oxley’s readings, taken on 28th April, 1818, were published in the Sydney Gazette on 13th. June,1818, stating the height as 76 ft… As for the glass panes, the ratios and proportionality is instructive. Do a little measuring of the panes. Morton Herman says “the windows are a square and a half, or two squares high, and the smallest units – the small window panes – are in the form of a square”. Are they so? Area of the window panes is of interest for both HYDE PARK BARRACK and GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE; as well as their disposition. Attached are some preliminary observations about the panes at HYDE PARK BARRACK and GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE; with my interpretation of their significance. Follow the argument: (See Glazed windows and their panes here) The ground floor windows in the North & South Elevations The Barrack ground floor windows, on the North and South elevations, extend 2.718m above the sills; expressing the transcendental number e as a metric length. The windows peak at 4m above ground and 3.8m above floor. In terms of historical precedent, the similar “handsom Windows of Tuscan Order” in Inigo Jones’ church of St Paul at Covent Garden suggest that the heights of the Barrack ground floor windows, on the North and South elevations, stand in their ratio as expressions of the Etruscan cubit/foot; that is, the ratio of e m ÷ 3.80…m = 0.357…m x 2; which expresses the Etruscan figure that features so largely in Jones’ design as well as in Greenway design. (See Covent Garden church here) Widths for the windows and their openings are 1.2m, 1.11m, 1.05m; each of which has metrological significance elsewhere in the design: 0.300m x 4; 0.555m x 2; 0.525m x 2. Relevant heights on the North and South Elevations include: 11.55m from roof to ground; echoed as heights at Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE; 11.1m; from stone string course to floor; echoed as a width at BRADLEY GRANGE; 11.25m from soffit to floor; cf. 225mm brick length x 50. Once again, references to passage of light abound: passage of starlight on revolving Earth at 462m per second ÷ 4; the 11.1-year cycle of Sun; the 3570m radius of our visual perception of radiation on globular Earth. HYDE PARK BARRACK’s designed emphasis on measures relating to light lends credence to the affirmation of the Newtonian interests of its composer. Further study of our Greenway architectural endowment offers many insights into the interpretation of Newton’s body of work and of his ‘body of light’; perhaps something to savour at another time. ----  Before proceeding inside the buildings on this comparative exercise, there are a few remarks about the North Range of Offices, the Macquarie Street frontage, the Confinement Cells, and the central Dormitory. Measured drawings based on accurate measuring are a valuable resource, especially when complemented/completed by annotations of the actual measurements taken. The work of the archivist for Sydney Living Museums means that researchers now have access to valuable data about Sydney’s Hyde Park Barrack. That makes it possible to compare data about two large Greenway projects, early and late in their careers, in conjunction with the already existing annotated drawings by architects Coupe Hewitt + Cserhalmi of Goulburn’s Bradley Grange steam-powered industrial complex. The work of the analyst of architectural drawings involves interpretation of collected data. Apart from being fraught with difficulty, interpretation is necessarily wide-ranging and reflects to a large extent the range of interests of the researcher, embedded usually in a different cultural timescale. In the case of our endowment of Greenway architectural practice, the only example of drawing that can be sourced definitively to Greenway – whether as Mary’s work or that of her husband - is the small drawing of a proposal for St Mary’s chapel, surviving in the Therrey Papers. Moreover, there is little historical record of commentary about the designs that can be sourced to the designers. So, there is little to guide, or to constrain, the analyst towards framing interpretation; apart from the extraordinary resource of the actual built work that still survives. There is no doubt that the built work embodies historical architectural and archaeological references. These abound in Greenway work and are necessarily explored and articulated by the analyst. To what extent such analysis reflects the conscious intent of the designers is difficult to ascertain. Nonetheless, there is cumulative effect from compilation of instances which lend some confidence towards acceptance that there is intent of certain sorts. If one assumes that there is a certain ethos of design and that the image determining the poiesis comprises some reasonably comprehensive set of principles, then connections of all sorts fall into place without there necessarily being explicit intent in a particular instance. The North Range Offices In the historical record, length of the Barrack site is given as 300’. Assuming that the record is correct, 300 British Imperial feet extend 300 x 0.30479974m = 91.439922m. The North Range Offices, according to the measured drawings, seem to extend approximately 81.55m + 0.880m = 82.430m, That reading in the Site Notes is along the South side. The Drawings note that there is sacrificial render applied to the western front. which is around 9m short of the expected reading, if British Imperial standard measure is being employed. Therein we are confronted by a puzzle; one of many such. The British Imperial standard was not legislated in Britain until 1824; the Barrack was completed in 1819. So, whose feet are being referred? (See before British Imperial here) The historical record invites examination of assumptions about standards of measurement, exposing the actuality, and antiquity, of standard English measures. Apart from that, the architect seems determined to illustrate Newton’s teaching in regard to Cubits and how they are configured in the ancient world. But what of the supposed 81.55m walled length, according to the Drawings and Site Notes? Is it 300 feet? The result of 81.55m ÷ 300 = 0.271833…; which does not seem to represent any standard foot. The unroofed length represents 30 e, as metres: 30 x 2.7182818… = 81.548…m. What about the roofed length? There are two factors involved in that calculation; each of which is presented in the Drawings. In the Ground Level Drawing, on the south-west end, an overhang of 0.400m of stone cornice of the corner confinement cell is indicated by a dotted line. That covering length, originally duplicated at the east end, means that length of the North Range of Offices becomes 81.550m + 0.800m = 82.350m; which just happens to represent the sum of 366 bricks of 0.225m: 81.550m + 0.800m = 81.350m = 0.225m x 366. In the First Floor Drawing the overall coverage of the roofed length is apparent, adding 2 x 0.440m, or 0.880m, to the walled length. The roofed length then presents as 81.55m + 0.880m = 82.430m. Can this 82.430m be construed as a length of 300 feet? If so, whose feet? There is an ancient and venerable foot/cubit length emergent there, since a foot of 0.27475m is the ‘half royal personage’ of a cubit extending 0.5495m; which is equally cubit of 0.314m x 28 ÷ 16; which refers, not pi, but the middling cubit of Herodotus, according to Newton: 0.27475m x 2 = 0.5495m = 0.314m x 28 ÷ 16 = (471 ÷ 1.5) x 28 ÷ 16; such that 300 feet of 0.27475m extend 82.425m; compared to the measurement 82.428m or 82.430m gleaned from the Drawings: 300 ‘royal personages’ of the ‘middling cubit’ of Herodotus. However, such historical reference to Newton and Herodotus and the Persian Empire, takes us back to the very beginning of our own inquiry, when we noted Macquarie’s Diary entry for 20th May, 1819, about 130 prisoners sleeping for the first time …: insofar as 2.747989074 x 2 = 5.495978149 = 0.1819512329-1; representing date 6th July, 1819 as the official opening. The date was an architectural imperative! If we take the date as the benchmark, then the length of the North Range of Offices (along the north side) is calculated to be 81.55967222m, as against the calculation of 30 e as 81.548m, and a reading from the Drawings directly as 81.55m. Take your pick! (See Proportion & Design here) In addition, the design shows the presence of more conventional 300 standard foot units along the East-West axis along which the North Range of Offices is housed. Consider the relevance of these 4 examples: 1. A major length on the Drawings is that which embraces the enclosing walls of the compound along the E-W axis, presented as 80.18m. Such a length is in fact 300 feet, where the relevant foot is the standard English foot measure known as the pes naturalis, or English Winchester foot, imported by the Saxons and enshrined by the Norman conquerors as the basic standard for English measures thereafter. Pes naturalis extends 305.4545mm; which means that the reading for length of the North Range can be taken as 80.1818…m. (0.3054545…m x 28 ÷ 16) ÷ 2 = 0.2672727…m; which x 300 = 80.1818…m. Such a foot infers a cubit of 0.534545…m (where the cubit is inferred to comprise 2 feet, being 2 halves of the ‘royal personage’). Recall that since the introduction of the septenary system of measures in Egypt, cubits are also construed to be divided into 28 parts or digits or fingers, 16 of which comprise a standard foot measure; such that the foot presents as the cubit length ÷ 28 x 16. (See Cubits & Feet here) 2. Another relevant length, of 80.3…m, is also 300 feet. That length extends from the inside of the enclosing West wall to the East end of the complex, as it is presented in the Drawings. 80.325m ÷ 300 = 0.26775m. Articulated in the ancient fashion as above, 0.26775m x 2 ÷ 28 x 16 = 0.306m. A foot extending 267.75mm is the dimensional basis for the architectural geometry of the Greenway brick chosen as the relevant pro-portional system for this design. (See Proportion & Design here) That sort of foot brings Inigo Jones and Isaac Newton into consideration as determiners of design parameters. Such extension, standardised as a foot measure, appears in Inigo Jones exploration of the provenance of English measures in his design of St Paul’s church at Covent Garden in London, being restored during Francis Greenway’s educational residence there in the office of ‘a prominent architect’, as Commissioner Bigge attests. (See Newton & Jones here) and (See Covent Garden church here) Such a foot measure is also the English foot (pes anglicorum) that Newton uses as the primary referand for comparison with Roman foot in his remarkable but now rather neglected Dissertation upon the Sacred Cubit of the Jews and Other Nations, composed as his contribution to contemporary debate about the merits of metric measure, arguing in favour of English foot to be the basis for elaboration of a metric measure, instead of the generally favoured Roman foot, while illustrating the deficiency in provenance of the competitive French foot (pied de roi). (See Newton’s Dissertation here) A key part of the debate about introduction of a metric measure was the relationship between Roman foot and Egyptian foot of 300mm. The publicised focus on 300 (feet) can be taken as indication that the design of HYDE PARK BARRACK is crafted within the context of that debate. (See metro cattolico here) 3. 80.00m from internal East wall to external wall of the recess on the West front of the Cell invite consideration of the ancient Egyptian planning technique based on a foursquare 40 x 40 x 4, presenting as a square 80 x 80 overall. The ratio 80 and the inch 25.4545…(mm) of the pes naturalis, referred above, introduces pi, as 22/7: 80 ÷ 25.4545… = 3.142857143. References to the Greenway use of the ratio 1 ÷ 25.45… can be found in other parts of this discussion, as well as throughout the Greenway portfolio of design. 4. 80.80m extends the previous length, from the inner East wall to the West end of the roofed North Range; and presents a passable reference to being length of 300 feet: 80.79636338m are 300 artabic or geographic feet of 0.30779567m, which is characterised by Newton in his Dissertation as ‘English foot’; and which modern metrologist Stecchini prefers as the true foundation of ancient standards of measurement, of which traditional English measures are the most stable exemplars. The ratio 1: 2.545, applied to the 80.80m length of the North Range Offices, introduces the Hebrew foot (i.e. the foot which is half of Newton’s longer Cubit of Moses): 80.80…m ÷ 2.545… = 31.749m. To be precise, since there are important issues at stake here: based on Newton’s analysis, the Cubit of Moses relates to the Cubit of Memphis as 6: 5m or 12:10. The relevant Cubit of Memphis is square root of 0.28m, or 0.52915026m; which means that the Cubit of Moses is calculated 0.52915026m x 6 ÷ 5 = 0.634980…m, and its (royal man) foot is half that: 0.317490156m. So, 100 such Hebrew feet are the rational expression of 80.8012…m ÷ 2.545. In his Dissertation, Newton leaves open the possibility that there are two versions of Jewish Cubit / foot, dependent from their 16: 15 ratio with the two versions of Roman foot. In the instance discussed above, it is the longer Roman scientific foot that is being referred. The shorter Cubit of Moses is 16/15 module of the shorter roman foot: 2 x 0.2959454m x 16 ÷ 15 = 0.631350m; 50 of which span 31.5675m, or 100 feet, since the cubit is 2 feet. That there are these three instances of 300 standard foot lengths along the East-West axis of the complex serves as foil for the lengths of the housed Offices; inducing further inquiry. The Confinement Cells Originally one at each corner of the complex, with only the north-west one surviving. The structure embodies a wide variety of measurements, making it a subject for intensive study in its own right. Some preliminary observations, noting the measurements presented in the Drawings in Scale 1/20@A1. I do not have access to Site Notes for this section. Not surprisingly, elements of design seen elsewhere in the complex are found here, configured differently. For example, running through the various marked widths on the West Elevation, in successive order, indicates that the chosen measurements are not random: Overall width on West Elevation is 38.1cm, reflecting a length of Dormitory; reducing to 378mm x 20 = 7.56m, which x 2 gives the longitude 151.2oE; then… 367.5mm x 20 x 8 = 588m = 336m x 28 ÷ 16, reflecting Goulburn Maltings length, and barley measures; 364.5mm x 20 x 4 = 291.6, for the artaba measure, seen as 130 feet along Dormitory; 342mm x 20 = 17.1m, seen in pavement, and as 0.5553m; 338.6mm, reflects Latitude of 33.8688oS; 337mm between walls, ??? had me stumped for a while; it is a major dimension after all; but taken with 204.8mm height of the entrance recess on the South Elevation, the area is 6.74m x 4.096m x 2 = 55.21408m2; referring the numeric of the ‘souls of the dead’ or ‘spirits of the netherworld’ given as “4.6012 million and they are 12 cubits”, or 4.6012 x 12(cubits) = 55.2144(cubits). (See Passage into Light here) 270.63mm x 20 = emergent roof x 64 ÷ 100 = √300; cupola 25.65m x 12 = 307.8m; cf. geographic foot; drum under: 244.4mm x 20 x 8 = 39.104m; cf. Dormitory length; 185.65mm x 20 x 8 = 2.9704m; cf. discussion on planetary movement, (See Proportion & Design here); 172mm x 20 x  or 22/7 presents, around the perimeter of the dome, the 1080 stars of primary brightness +1 discovered by William Herschel in Greenway’s time Cf. M. O’Halloran, Remembering ‘The First Time’. Francis Howard Greenway at Work in Australia, Goulburn(GBPublishers)2006 ISBN 0-9581262-5-9 p.98; a host of other references cluster around the final two features of width: 64mm 59mm ratio 58.972992 ÷ 64 = 0.921453; which as 921.453m is the measured circuit of the Great Pyramid, dealt with by the Greenways in the BRADLEY GRANGE design in the wash-down area in front of the tobacco kiln. cf. M. O’Halloran, Remembering ‘The First Time’. Francis Howard Greenway at Work in Australia, Goulburn(GBPublishers)2006 ISBN 0-9581262-5-9pp.130-133 Whereas 58.95273168 x  x 64 x 2 = 23706, referring the Greenway name cipher. The cap on the dome, being measured here, tapers at the edge, allowing another possible variation: 58.875mm x 20 x 4 = 4.71m; cf. Herodotus’ ‘middling cubit’, and the 235.5mm stone wall height. Internal: height 6.6m = 20 x 0.330m = 0.165m x 40; 5.45…m = (35.7…m x 0.30545) ÷ 2 5.2m = 1.30 x 4. Internal Length from N wall to door: 5.775m cf. sidereal time 462m ÷ 80 to outer edge of step: 6.15m = 12.3 ÷ 2 cf. Timaeus dialogue to outer edge of pavement: 7.392m x 16 = 462m are nice touches for prisoners, emerging into light, following the 1, 2, 3 steps that begin the beginning of Plato’s dialogue Timaeus, with all that is contained within. Taking a closer look: The supposed proportional system, discussed previously, derives from the architectural volumetric geometry of the brick, based on the dimensions of the chosen foot. (See Proportion & Design here) Perhaps the same sort of proportionality can be taken to apply to the stone blocks of the mason’s module? Designed and built as stonework rather than brickwork, West Elevation wall is 15 courses over 232mm x 20, + 0.5mm x 20 for top mortar bed, making stone wall height as either 4.64m or 4.65m, where the latter evokes the 930mm dimension of the pilasters on the Dormitory. The stone wall of the Cell sits on a block that is 60mm deep, above current pavement level, making the height 4.64m + 0.06m = 4.70m, or 4.65m + 0.060m = 4.71m; clearer on South Elevation where there is a well-defined base, and where the boundary wall meets the South face of the Cell. Variable marked heights of stone wall: South Elevation East end is 235.5mm; refers 10 cubits of Newton & Herodotus of 471mm; whose ‘half royal personage’ is 235.5mm’; South Elevation West end is 233 and 233.5mm; 233mm x 20 = 4.66m and 233.5mm x 20 = 4.67m; can be taken to refer to the pythagorean tuning of the ancient musical scale centred on the note  or D, as 140 ÷ 3 = 46.66… cf. M. O’Halloran, Revisiting the Ancient Musical Scale and the Paradox of Pythagoras, Goulburn 2004 ISBN 0 9581262 3 2, pp.97-101. The figure returns as a theme in the designs of St Mary’s chapel and of Fernhill, the house for Edward Cox at Mulgoa. West Elevation South end is 236 and 236.5mm at base of adjacent wall; taking the average of these terms, Longitude 151.2oE is referred: 236.25mm x 64 = 15.120m. Applying the calculation from brick proportionality, in accordance with its geometry, to the 235.5mm (x 20) stone wall height of the Cell block: 235.5mm (x 20) ÷ 0.70 ÷ 12 x 10 x 2 ÷ 28 x 16 = 320.4081633mm (x20); which suggests that length of the largely destroyed southern half of the Macquarie Street frontage would extend 32.040m; such that the overall walled length presents as 31.960m + 32.040m = 64.000m, overlapping at the housing of the drop bolt of the central gates. The housing is thereby predicated to be 111mm wide; which accords with on-site measuring. The consequence is that the gates are centred, without being halved, on a boundary length of 63.888…m; which is 255.555…m ÷ 4; evoking the unciae of Newton’s English foot and the supposed key to Greenway elegance in design. The implication is that the North Cell Block and the southern half length of the Macquarie St frontage are related in their dimensions; and vice versa for the destroyed South Cell block. Another suggestion about the intent of the design: it presages the discussion that was being had subsequently in the design of St Mary’s chapel, across the road, about the mass of Earth, (where extensive use is made of the factor 157 and its triple which is the ‘middling cubit’ of 471mm, whose half royal man is 235.5mm); in conjunction with the ‘true’ english foot of 304.401mm. The english foot of 304.401mm is a feature of St Mary’s design rather than in the dimensions of this Cell block. In raw figures: (471 ÷ 2) x (304.401 ÷ 12) = 5.973869625, which stands well against NASA reading of 5.9723 x 1024kg for mass of Earth. (See Mass of Earth here) Such interpretation is supported by the volumetric of the Cell block itself, suggesting the English rod of 5.04m as referand (quite apart from the rod as a punishing device), insofar as 38.1m x 36.6m x 36.143m = 50400m3; where english rod of 5.04m is considered to be a unit divisor of Earth’s dimensions, related to the ancient determinations about the radius of our vision on revolving Earth, and about the passage of starlight; issues dealt with in the design of the Dormitory. Cf. M. O’Halloran, The Foundations of Ancient Science. Conversations with Francis Howard Greenway about his Obelisk in Macquarie Place Sydney Australia, Goulburn 2002 ISBN 0 9581262 0 8; pp.156-165. Also in support, the superstructure above the naked stone wall of the Cell block rises 126mm x 20 = 2.52m, or 5.04m ÷ 2. The bare stone wall, as 4.64m (232mm x 20 in Scale) is of interest. The 14 intervening mortar beds constitute 7mm of Scale, reducing the stonework to 225mm x 20; which takes us back to the proportionality of the dried brick issuing from a mould fabricated from a standard foot; and to the dimension of the typical brick used in Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK. Its modular double is 450mm (x 20), presenting the common egyptian cubit which is the 1.5 multiple of the common Egyptian foot used as dimension of the stone blocks; and which lies at the very core of the intense historical debate by Burattini and Greaves and Newton about the metro cattolico. (See metro cattolico here) The 15 courses cover 232mm x 20 = 4.64m; applying the brick proportionality: 232 ÷ 0.70 ÷ 12 x 10 x 2 ÷ 28 x 16 = 315.65; cf. Newton’s calculation of the shorter jewish cubit: 63.13m ÷ 2 = 31.565m. (See Newton’s Dissertation here) There is much more to be gleaned from a study of the measurements of the Confinement Cell block; these few observations must suffice, as introduction to the sophistication and simplicity of Greenway design. Newton puts it best: “This is what I thought proper to lay down at present …. Hereafter perhaps those, who shall view … the monuments …, by taking accurately the various dimensions of the stones, bricks, foundations, and walls, and comparing them together, will discover something more certain and exact.” Dissertation p.431 Macquarie Street Frontage A substantial part of the Macquarie Street frontage has been destroyed, as well as the whole of the South Range of Offices referred in the historical record. The overall design is to be construed as 4 area-parts, as indicated in Morton Herman’s Site Plan, but in ancient practice the division is not expected to be equal, rather, like the musical scale, proportionata inegualglianza; halved, without being centred. Thus far, the measurements analysed show intimate connections between the built fabric of Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK and Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE. Taken in conjunction, those designs enable further consideration of the measurements of the Macquarie Street frontage. At Bradley Grange in Goulburn, north side of the Steam Mills relates to the frontage as 2.545, but the south side relates as 2.54 (which will be recognised from the 25.4mm of our current inch; but that inch and its foot is of ancient provenance, dating back at least to the time of Akhenaten.) Since the south side of the Barrack complex is no longer extant, it is not possible to say that such rationality applied here; but it is usual ancient practice, in the northern hemisphere, for the north side to be shorter than the south side – the opposite being the case in the antipodes). You may have noticed evidence of this in previous discussions about the Dormitory measurements. There are clearly defined lines of length across the Macquarie Street frontage, derived from, and to be interpreted in the light of, Isaac Newton’s Dissertation …; for example: The length from the North external walled edge of the corner Cell to the centre of Main Gates presents in the Drawings as less than 32.0m, at around 31.95…m. This may seem to be a curious figure for such a significant expanse of street front. However, this measurement may be taken as a good example of how a seemingly anomalous length could easily be written off as a mere dimensional peculiarity rather than being a proportional element. (See Proportion & Design here) The longer Cubit of Moses is 2 x 0.3175m = 0.635m, being 16: 15 of the longer roman foot extending 0.2976…m 50 such longer hebrew feet, or 25 such cubits, can be seen at the very centre of the complex, embracing the domes above the entrance Lodges: 31.75m ÷ 2 = 15.875m = 50 feet (recalling the contemporary testimony that the Dormitory is 50 feet wide; ‘whose feet?’ still being the relevant question; in this case, 50 jewish or Hebrew feet). By contrast, width between the external walls of the Lodges embraces 50 drusian feet, evoking the north-german heritage of English measures: 16.666m = 50 x 0.3333m. The roofed Lodges span 17.1m, reflecting the 1.71m depth of the stone pavement in front of the Dormitory. And height The central gateway is framed by stone pillars, 3.65m apart, reinforcing the theme of time: the spread of the Sothic cycle of 1460 days / years; the days of the year. The smaller gateways on either side of the main entrance show as 900mm or 3 common Egyptian feet on the west front, but widen to 1.30m on the internal east wall, recalling Macquarie’s 130 emphasis; harmonising with the 3.25m (13.0m ÷ 4) height of the main gate posts. The Wall Wall between North Lodge and North Cell has been reconstructed. There is a remnant of original wall still attached to the South side of South Lodge. Current pavement along Macquarie Street frontage slopes North to South. Drawings of Internal Courtyard Elevation give a more satisfactory base line. Thus: Wall heights relative to base of Lodge, at junction with North Lodge, is 136mm x 20 = 2720mm above ground; and slightly less than 144mm x 20 = c. 2880mm; given the Greenway interests expressed elsewhere, these measurements can be taken as referring the transcendental number e as 2.718…, and to the related value of the security code 14.39… x 2, employed to assert and protect Greenway copyright in design, being also the natural log of the Greenway name cipher 0.2371. (See Mathematics of Curves here) Original remnant of wall adjacent to South Lodge in these drawings of Internal Courtyard Elevation, presents as 140mm x 20 and 144mm x 20 as the relevant heights. Original remnant of wall is 8 courses of blocks each 300mm deep, on top of a block 220mm above the Macquarie St pavement at the junction with South Lodge; coping above 9th row of stone wall is 5.0mm x 20 = 100mm deep. The theme of time is further indicated by the height of the enclosing wall at its junction with the North Lodge, along the Macquarie St face, being 2.72m, expressing the 2.718… value of the transcendental number e, governing Newtonian movement as movendi growth or as quiescendi decay. The positive aspect is further indicated by the 5.25m ÷ 2 height of the wall at that junction, below its coping, as 10 feet of the royal personage of Egypt (the royal cubit being what Newton found it to be: 0.525m). Heights from ground on South side of South Lodge: along the West face of the wall along Macquarie St: 140.00mm x 20 = 2800mm 134.50mm x 20 = 2690mm 135.00mm x 20 = 2700mm; the mean or average of the two latter readings: 2690 + 2700 = 5390mm, which represents height as 10 artabic feet: 5390mm ÷ 28 x 16 = 3080mm. Height of wall is relevant to two items of historical record: Commissioner Bigge’s reporting as to 10½ feet; and to the newspaper report quoted above that the Range of Offices stand “of the height only of the enclosing wall”. Whose feet? We may now know whose feet were being referred. The wall itself, fronting Macquarie St, between the Cell and the north Lodge, is 31.9m ÷ 2 long, and 32.0m ÷ 2 spans the space between the Cell and the chimney of the North Lodge, linking three important standards of measurement: the English rod and the Cubit of Moses and the (ancient) metre: 5.04m x 0.635m x 10m = 32m x 1m x 1m. and links to the Greenway name cipher: (See Proportion & Design here) South side of the chimney pot locks in a length of 32.5m ÷ 2 from the wall-Cell junction; as Macquarie’s 130 ÷ 8. *  Greenway celebration of the work of John Napier and Isaac Newton, towards the formulation and application of the transcendental number e, is to be found throughout the elements of design in Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK. That celebration is woven around the theme of Time; the first and last ratios of growth and decay; the first and last ratios of movement; affirming that such is the stuff of architecture. Analysis of the built dimensions confirms the brute facts of the historical record; but beyond that, the historical record points to the way to interpret the building’s design as an eloquent metrological affirmation that merits a place in the history of technology, and in the annals of the history and philosophy of science, alongside its current listing in the UNESCO World Heritage register. The architectural work of Mary Moore Greenway and of Francis Howard Greenway belongs within the context of the intellectual life, indeed, ferment, in Australia’s early European history; a subject that deserves greater attention. Astrophysicist Dr Ragbir Bhathal laments that “It seems that the convict past is more important than Australia’s intellectual history.” R. Bhathal, “Some scientific aspects of Parramatta Observatory”, Journal & Proceedings of Royal Society of NSW, vol.145 nos.445-6 p.124. He advocates that the Parramatta Observatory site, representing Australia’s intellectual history and heritage, should be included in the UNESCO World Heritage List. The Parramatta Bath House, designed for Governor Brisbane by former convict Francis Howard Greenway to celebrate the mathematical and scientific genius of Isaac Newton, is a worthy exemplar of the intellectual and scientific endeavour expressed in Governor Brisbane’s Observatory, its immediate neighbour. The current listing of Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK in the UNESCO World Heritage register is due to its convict history; paradoxically, perhaps, it deserves listing equally as a vibrant example of Australia’s intellectual history. * Having concentrated in some detail on the features of the Dormitory and its housing within the HYDE PARK BARRACK compound, what might be the relevance for comparison with the design of GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE? Once again, recall where we were? GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE The complex is situated on the west bank of the Mulwaree Chain of Ponds which form part of the mighty Hawkesbury River catchment, on a slight mound in a flat plain beneath a long low hill to the east (Lansdowne), gently rising ground to the south, hilly country to the west and the heavily wooded Cookbundoon Range further to the north. Governor Macquarie and his party camped on or near the site in 1820. In his diary, Lachlan Macquarie records the scene: “… we reached the north-west boundary of Goulburn Plains… Here we halted at a quarter past four p.m. and pitched our camp in a noble, rich meadow, near a fine large pond of fresh water, the cattle being up to their bellies in as fine, long sweet grass as ever I saw anywhere. The distance from where we last crossed the Wollondilly is about four miles to our present camp, making this day’s journey about sixteen miles and by far the most disagreeable stage we have come, but the grandeur, beauty and richness, independent of the usefulness of the country we are now in, sufficiently compensates for all the labour and toils of this long day’s journey.” (Diary 22 October 1820) Soon afterwards pioneering tobacco growers, Jonas Bradley and his sons, were petitioning the Governor for land “better suited to growing tobacco”. Within two years they were constructing a homestead on the bluff overlooking the extensive plains and the verdant meadow and ponds described by Macquarie. The Bradleys were granted permission to purchase 4,000 acres along the eastern banks of the Mulwaree Chain of Ponds: 2,000 acres in Jonas Bradley’s name (Lansdowne) and 1,000 acres each for his two sons, Thomas Bradley (Gundary Plains) and William Bradley. The homestead on Lansdowne is now the oldest lived-in house in the Goulburn district. The Grange site lies on the western side of the Mulwaree Ponds. It is puzzling that the Grange was not built upon the lands already owned by the Bradleys on the other side of the Ponds. William Bradley, who had married Emily Elizabeth Hovell in 1831, purchased the land in 1833. The acquisition bears the imprint of Francis Howard Greenway’s intervention. His buildings incorporate the latitude of the place in the very measurements of the building itself. The latitude of the Bradley Grange site, at the Steam Mills, is 34.760S. The architect has designed the Steam Mills to be 34.76 metres long. The historical resonance that could be achieved by building this complex on the new site would have been compelling for the architect. The historical reference is specifically to renaissance architect Andrea della Gondola, known as Palladio. In his published work, Palladio used a standard of measurement known as the vicentine foot. The name comes from its common use in and around the district of Vicenza in Italy. Actual extension of Palladio’s vicentine foot is yet to be agreed among scholars. His Vicentine foot is sometimes taken as the Venetian foot, but more frequently these days it is taken for Etruscan foot. Venetian foot measures 347.6 mm. Etruscan foot measures 357.14…m. The Greenways address the complex issues involved in determination of a length for Palladio’s Vicentine foot by means of specific references that can be identified in their built work, especially in Goulburn’s Bradley Grange complex and in Sydney’s Hyde Park Barrack. One of Palladio’s remarkable villas is the villa Foscari on the banks of the Brenta Canal outside Venice. It was built for the Foscari brothers. Here, on the banks of the Mulwaree Chain of Ponds, for the Bradley brothers, the Greenways had the chance to create a masterpiece worthy of the old master. Given the venetian and vicentine provenance of Emily Hovell’s Foscari heritage, the conjunction between the latitude of the new site and the measurement of the vicentine foot, the possibility of building an echo of the villa Foscari in the antipodes would have been irresistible. In the event, it proved to be a happy choice. The Great South Road was under construction. It opened as a toll road in 1836, commencing at the toll gate on the Lansdowne Bridge near Liverpool outside of Sydney and finishing at the toll gate on the Lansdowne Bridge beside the Brewery at the Bradley Grange. The citizens of the burgeoning new town, which had been removed to its present site in 1833, could avoid the toll when they traded with the variety of businesses incorporated into the new complex on the western side of the bridge and its toll. The dimensional configuration of GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE is determined explicitly by the features discussed so far, tying GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE’s design inescapably to that of the HYDE PARK BARRACK. GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE ground Plan is a square of 100 etruscan cubits, containing 3 distinct premises: Mews of Stables & Workers’ Cottages; the Brewer’s Cottage; and the main bulk, housing the industrial processes of the Steam Mills, Maltings, Brewery, Cooperage, Offices, Tobacco Kiln. The disposition of built forms and industrial processes at GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE are related through e and the Etruscan foot, as are the internal and external lengths of the HYDE PARK BARRACK Dormitory: The stone string courses on the external North side length of the Dormitory are set 38.05m from either end of the overhanging roof. Note that e x 14 = 38.0559452; Whereas the ratio e ÷ 0.35714285 = 3.805594596 x2. Conventionally the Etruscan foot is given as 14 inches. Such divides the Etruscan foot of 357.14285mm into 14 x 25.5102…mm; which introduces another feature of Greenway architecture, one which relates to Newton’s work and the panoply of English measures; (See before British Imperial here) A ‘place’ or location is determined as a ratio of the Latitude and Longitude of that place. The ‘place’ or location of HYDE PARK BARRACK is given as the point of conjunction between longitude 151o 12’ 27.00” E and latitude 33o 52’ 5.99” S of that place. These are the co-ordinates given in Wikipedia for HYDE PARK BARRACK, but without indication as to where precisely on site the readings were taken. Thus, the ‘place’ or location of HYDE PARK BARRACK is given as the point of conjunction between longitude 151o 12’ 27.00” E and latitude 33o 52’ 5.99” S of that place. The ratio Longitude 151.2075o ÷ latitude 33.86833o = 4.464569112; which x 80 = 357.165529; noting that one Etruscan foot = 357.14285mm. The significance of this, is that the Egyptian technique of planning, of drawing plans, throughout the arts and sciences, is based upon a foursquare divided into 80 units. Such is the planning matrix for the design of Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE, being a foursquare of sides 100 etruscan cubits, or 200 etruscan feet. That ratio of HYDE PARK BARRACK longitude and latitude also determines the disposition of the complex of industrial buildings at GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE. There is an intimate relationship in design between HYDE PARK BARRACK and Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE. Thus: the widths of the buildings and the widths of the intervening spaces, along the north-south axis of the foursquare of sides 35.714m of GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE, are disposed as multiples of the HYDE PARK BARRACK’s longitude and latitude conjunctim: Longitude 151.2075o ÷ latitude 33.86833o = 4.464569112; which x 80 = 357.14…; where the ratio of degrees presents as a modular double in (deci)metres: Mews 10 x 4.464569112 x 2 = 89.291dm Grain delivery area 18 x 4.464569112 x 2 = 160.724dm Steam Mills 12 x 4.464569112 x 2 = 107.149dm Tobacco Kiln 9 x 4.464569112 x 2 = 80.362dm Maltings 7 x 4.464569112 x 2 = 62.503dm Excise area – Cooperage 13 x 4.464569112 x 2 = 116.078dm Brewery 11 x 4.464569112 x 2 = 98.220dm Total: 80 714.327dm = 2 x 357.1635dm. Precise equivalent of Etruscan foot presents the ratio as 4.464285625. The Goulburn site is worked, in the Egyptian fashion, from a foursquare grid of 40 x 40 x 4. The components are grouped according to function, but in such a way that their arrangement presents both types of Egyptian cubits: the common cubit of 24 digits or fingers, and the royal or septenary cubit of 28 digits or fingers. The design is balanced, in the Pythagorean fashion, in terms of the same number of even (female) and odd (male) digits or fingers; all co-ordinated according to the ratio of the co-ordinates of HYDE PARK BARRACK! (See Cubits & Feet & Fingers here) Regarding the definition of ‘place’ for GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE and its unique ‘place’ and status, note that the axes of the square of Plan meet at Latitude 34.76oS. The selection of site, with such position, has its own historical architectural reference; and affirms the architect’s remarkable tribute to the client. The South side length of the Steam Mills along that central axis is 34.76m; which is the length of 100 venetian feet. Perhaps it can be agreed that HYDE PARK BARRACK and GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE have common genesis in design; flowering from a continuity that characterises the ancient provenance of English measures. Time now to venture inside the HYDE PARK BARRACK Dormitory and the Steam Mills at Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE. Our observations, for this exercise, will be confined to features of the internal roof structures. Neither have ceilings. Both buildings, as did the original interior format of Inigo Jones’ church of St Paul at Covent Garden, exhibit “the carpenter’s view of architecture as a structural art”. S.E. Rasmussen, Experiencing Architecture, Cambridge(MITPress)1964 pp.48ff Little attention had been paid to the roof structures used in renaissance architecture, until David Yeomans attempted to redress this neglect through his study of the trussed roof. He suggests that one of the reasons for this neglect is because, unlike the gothic roofs where the structural elements are fully on view, the renaissance buildings had ceilings, which obscured the view of the innovative structures supporting the roof. (See Truss Roofs here) On Level 3 of the Steam Mills, the flooring above is a working platform to receive grain for gristing, strung above and supported by the tie beams of the roof trusses, and serves no structural purpose in the building. Without that platform, the roof form is wholly open, and the interior space wholly unencumbered by posts or columns; like that seen in the Great Hall of the Brewery. In the Steam Mills, the columns/posts beneath are there to support the weight of moving grain on the working platform, and, on lower levels, to support the weight of grain and processing stones and machines and storage bins on the floors. None of those posts have any structural role in supporting the roof. The weight of each floor is carried on a different skin of brickwork, as you will note from the stepped-in form of the walls, becoming thicker as you descend. The outside skin of brickwork is dedicated to carrying and supporting the wall-plate, and the roof thereby. The roof structure of the Steam Mills features queen-post trusses, 7 in number, allowing free movement along the working platform. HYDE PARK BARRACK Dormitory features king-post trusses, 9 in number. There the weight of the roof, carried by the trusses, is transferred to and supported by the thick brick piers, which act, as columns are supposed to do, as structural supportive features; and so, the piers can be considered to be pilasters in the strict sense; whether they explicitly embody some reference to the classic Orders of Architecture is another matter. (See Columns without Walls here) The queen-post truss structure at GOULBURN’S BRADLEY GRANGE, with its cincture of cantilevered jack-joists securing the wall-plate and forming wide overhanging eaves around all four sides, echoes that of the Covent Garden church, following its reconstruction by Thomas Hardwick in the 1790s. There is one notable difference: whereas Hardwick’s roof purlins are 6.5” wide by 9” deep, Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE roof purlins are a metric measure version, being 6.5cm wide by 9cm deep. (See Covent Garden church here) Note that there are no surviving cantilevered jack-joists in some sections of the internal roof fabric at the HYDE PARK BARRACK Dormitory. ….  Epilogue This discussion about elements of Greenway design exhibited in Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE and Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK has focussed on studies by Isaac Newton and Inigo Jones into English measures; portraying our Greenway endowment in antipodes as a continuity and a concinnitas. Inigo Jones took much of his inspiration from his studies of Palladio’s works: both built fabric and papered designs and treatises. It may therefore be appropriate to consider whether our Greenway legacy might have something to contribute to further study of Palladio’s works. Rudolf Wittkower’s researches into Palladio’s architecture, and into architectural ethos of the renaissance period more generally, stimulated renewed interest last century into use of proportional systems as helpful tools to assist architectural design and execution. The carefully developed ‘rules’ that are characteristic of proportional systems are necessarily somewhat abstract and general as to their applicability. Perhaps too readily, anomalies are dismissed as “restrictions and consequences pertaining to construction and other practical issues”. F. Benelli, “Rudolf Wittkower versus Le Corbusier: A Matter of Proportion”, Architectural Histories, The Open Access Journal of European Architectural History Network, Special Collection: Objects of Belief: Proportional Systems in the History of Architecture. https://journal.eahn.org/articles/10.5334/ah.ck/. However, Newton has made us all aware that it is the ‘perturbations’ that demand attention, those ‘little bits that don’t fit’. Such investigation of Newton’s perturbations, after all, is what led to the European settlement of Australia in the first place, and that determined Governor Brisbane on his world-famous astronomical observations via his Parramatta Observatory (after a dip in his Greenway-designed Bath House next door). Rudolf Wittkower himself was well aware of such ‘little bits that don’t fit’; and was careful to mention them. It is those ‘little bits that don’t fit’ in Wittkower’s studies of Palladio that Australian Greenway architecture helps to explain. Consider just 3 examples: Rudolf Wittkower gives the Villa Godi, at Lonedo di Lugo, near Vicenza, as a simpler exemplar of Palladio’s interest in harmonic proportion in design; and the Villa Foscari, outside of Venice, as a “somewhat more complicated” illustration; R. Wittkower, Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanism, being Vol. 10 of The Studies of the Warburg Institute, London(Tiranti)1967 p.129. the dimensions of the Villa Almerico-Capra (La Rotonda), south-east of Vicenza, as given by Stephen Wassell, S.R. Wassell, “Mathematics of Palladio’s Villas”, Nexus Network Journal, vol.1(1999)pp.121-128. http://www.nexusjournal.com/Wassell.htm allow a comparative perspective, into and beyond Palladio’s work, because the built form apparently exhibits the input of Scamozzi, among others. Although Wittkower says that Villa Godi is the simpler exemplar, I will leave its analysis until last. Villa Godi was built long before the others, ranking as one of Palladio’s earliest works; however, its dimensions serve to confirm the points of analysis being made for Villa Foscari and for Villa Almerico-Capra. Villa Foscari Recall the Foscari lineage of the client for design of Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE and the embodiment there of venetian / etruscan foot and the vicentine foot. In a footnote to his discussion of the harmonic proportion evident in the design of Villa Foscari, Rudolf Wittkower says: “The only measurement in this building which is not easily intelligible is the length of the hall measuring 46½ feet, where one would have expected 48 feet. … I cannot offer a fully satisfactory explanation.” R. Wittkower, Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanism, being Vol. 10 of The Studies of the Warburg Institute, London(Tiranti)1967 p.130, footnote 1. Wittkower does not say whose feet he is referring. Anomalies are such only in relation to the regula application of a method founded on certain principia. When something doesn’t fit, then there may be place for it in a method founded on other specific ‘beginnings’ that allow application of different regula. When Wittkower says that he cannot offer a satisfactory explanation, he means that he cannot - within the context of the regula of harmonic proportion. He should not be taken as saying that he cannot fit the anomaly within such other regula. All that I am offering here is to explore a likely basis – other plausible beginnigs (principia) - for regula proportionality illustrated in our Greenway architecture. The first comparative issue that springs out from this is the recollection that the piers/pilasters of the Dormitory at Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK present as 46.5cm x 2, or 930mm in width. Apart from Greenway indicating a Sydney reference in design to a singular feature of Villa Foscari and its Hall, Palladio’s more immediate reference is likely to be to the brickwork features of his design: the proportionality of brick itself; and the fact that plinths for columns are regularly presented as 930mm. Branko Mitrovic expresses a commonly held view about the level of precision that one might expect in the survey of masonry structures. In setting out the rationale for new surveys of Palladio’s villas, with Steve Wassell and team, and focussing on the proportional system exhibited in Villa Cornaro, he writes: “Analyzing the proportional system of an executed building is not the same thing as working with a set of an architect’s drawing. Precision in the execution of a built work can never be great. In the case of Palladio, we can safely rely on considerable precision in stonecutting. Those elements of the orders which were executed in stone show a high level of precision in execution. But when it comes to built walls and masonry work, the level of precision is not nearly so great. One can hardly expect precision greater than 5 cm.” A properly trained craftsman would construe such allowance as an insult to competence; moreover, there is no evidence that Greenway practice tolerates such departure from precision – other than the usual colonial cringe of the commentator. Perhaps the deficiencies of a proportional system might be the first focus rather than those of the construction. See article “Andrea Palladio’s Villa Cornaro on Piombino Dese”, presented at the conference: Nexus 2004: Relationships Between Architecture and Mathematics, 19-23 June 2004 in Mexico City. In the course of a fresh survey of Villa Cornaro, Branko Mitrovic notes a feature of its Ionic columns, “that the lower column diameter of ground floor columns was meant to be about 70.3 cm and plinths are regularly 930 mm.” “The precision in stonecutting allows one to conclude with great certainty that the lower column diameter of ground floor columns was meant to be about 70.3 cm and plinths are regularly 930 mm.” ibid. The ratio 703: 930 is of interest for the australian designs being considered in this comparative exercise where attention has been drawn to the design principles crafted around geographic co-ordinates, in which longitude of the Sydney site is taken as 151.2oE; noting that the ratio 703: 930 is 1.51182… ÷ 2; and the reciprocal ratio 930 ÷ 703 is 5.2916… ÷ 4, evoking the proportionality implicit in Newton’s longer Cubit of Memphis and its etruscan foot consequence (discussed above), consistent with an affirmation of Alberti’s championing of vernacular brick. Here at Villa Foscari, the built work features fully bricked shafts for columns with Ionic capitals set wholly on their bases without allowance for stucco covering. In this interpretation, Palladio’s clear celebration of the glory of naked brickwork in this design is pointed to by the 46½ P. notation. The second comparative issue that springs out is the fact that 10 x 46.5 venetian feet extend 80.817m x 2; which evokes the discussion in the main text comparing Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK and Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE, about the lengths of the east-west axis of Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK, in which that length of 80.8m represents 300 feet of the persian (artabic) ‘royal personage’. Analysis also noted that the hebrew foot (of 0.3175m) presents as the 2.545… ratio of a length of 80.818m. The Hall is given as 32 feet wide. An area predicated on sides of 46.5feet x 32feet = 2976 square feet ÷ 2; evoking the metric value of roman scientific foot as 0.2976m. Heights are not discussed by Wittkower since these are rarely given in Palladio’s notations. However, J.J. Lancha presents a list of measurements for Villa Foscari, which can assist our inquiry. Joubert José Lancha, Idea and Ideal. Vaults and cupolas in Palladio’s Villa Foscari, http://www.arquitetura.eesc.usp.br/. There, height of the Hall is given as 24 feet. Notional volume of a supposed bulk 32 x 46.5 x 24 is 35,712 units (cubic etruscan feet in this case); suggesting the relevance of etruscan foot of 0.35714…m; which, in metric terms, is a volume of 1,500 cubic metres; tying in the common egyptian foot (of 0.300m) thereby. With great economy of expression, roman foot, etruscan/venetian foot, persian/artabic foot, hebrew foot, common egyptian foot and ancient metre are brought together, or brought to attention, under Palladio’s rubric of 46½ P. Actual volume of the Hall is 30,144 cubic feet or 1266.018886cubic metres. One twelfth (Newton’s uncia) of that is 105.5m3, which will be recognised as the co-relative of 254.5m3 supposed from a curving 360m3 line. Hence, the relevance of the 2.545 ratio, mentioned above. However, for an englishman of Inigo Jones’ calibre, the implied reference is to the unciae of the english Winchester foot, which is the pes naturalis of north-german measurement standards, in which 25.45…mm x 12 = 305.45…mm. So, the english Winchester foot / pes naturalis is added to the concinnitas of measurement standards conjuncted in the 46½ P. of Portia’s Hall. The seemingly anomalous 46.5 feet length of Portia’s Hall “that light we see is burning in my hall”, Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, V. i.102. Recall that Belmont, Portia’s house in the play, is historically the Villa Foscari. has powerful metrological affect. * * Room volume of the mid side rooms in Villa Foscari, as 16 feet x 16 feet x 21.328 feet given in Lancha, loc.cit. as 21.328 feet; whereas 21.333… arises from the ratio of ratios 32 x 16 ÷ 24; and the 3-part division of a block or bulk of 64 units, which is of considerable constructional moment in the architectonics of design. = 5,459.968cubic feet, does not sound particularly exciting, on the face of it. However, 16 feet x 16 feet x 21.33632813 feet = 5,462.1cubic feet brings into play Palladio’s P. notations as brick referands, insofar as 5,462.1 ÷ 17 = 321.3, which is a factor in the Greenway formula for dried brick issuing from a mould crafted from english foot of 306(mm): insofar as 321.3 x 0.7 = 224.91; recalling the formula relating brick size and foot: 224.91mm ÷ 0.7 = 321.3mm; ÷ 12 x 10 = 267.75mm; x 2 = 535.5mm; ÷ 28 x 16 = 306mm. * The riverfront side rooms are given as 16’ x 24’ x 20’; confirming brick as the relevant proportionality. Follow the reasoning: Recall that discussion of the geometric of proportionality of the bricks at Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK presented the following formula which expresses the dimension of a dried brick issuing from a mould crafted from a standard foot; in that case, Inigo Jones’ and Isaac Newton’s english foot of 306mm: 224.91mm ÷ 0.7 = 321.3mm; ÷ 12 x 10 = 267.75mm; x 2 = 535.5mm; ÷ 28 x 16 = 306mm. Now consider that the relevant foot standard for brick-making in Vicenza would most likely be the venetian foot of 0.3476m, which would be used as the foot standard for fabrication of their brick mould. By the same formula: 347.6mm x 28 ÷ 16 ÷ 2 x 12 ÷ 10 x 0.7 = 255.486mm; which, x 12, will be recognised as unciae of 10 feet, extending 10 x 0.3065832m; suggesting inherent concinnitas between Palladio’s venetian foot and Inigo Jones’ and Isaac Newton’s english foot. It is inconceivable that Inigo Jones would not have noticed this. Volume of the riverfront rooms at Villa Foscari presents in the raw numeric as 16 x 24 x 20 = 7680 = 255.486 x 30.06035556. There is notable principled continuity between the volumetric of these rooms at Villa Foscari and the volumetric of the brick exemplars chosen for the various australian constructions that constitute our Greenway architectural endowment. The built work that is Villa Foscari emphasises, and even glories in, the raw fabric of its brickwork; as does our Greenway legacy which serves to illuminate it. * Volume of the smaller Rooms, fronting the park and the road to and from Venice, given as 12’ x 16’ x 14’ is 2,688cubicfeet. These rooms allow access to the apartments. Volume as 2688-units is the reciprocal expression of the design elements of the whole piano nobile and its Hall: 2688-1 = 372 = 93.0 x 4 = 2976 ÷ 8 = 46.5 x 8 = 46.5 x 32 ÷ 4 = 46.5 x 64 ÷ 8 = 46.5 x (46.5 + 12 + 5.5) ÷ 8. * Before leaving Villa Foscari: Wittkower seems to be perfectly happy with the 32 feet dimensional width of the hall in Portia’s house, even though at a loss to explain the relevance of the length of 46.5 feet. Note the mathematics of 32 venetian feet: 32 x 0.3476m x 10 = 111.232m = 10.546658242; which will be recognized from the discussion above as the generatrix of the Greenway name cipher, insofar as 10.54665824 x 4 = 0.02370419-1; with all its ancient and modern physical equipage, as discussed. The suggestion is that Palladio’s notations may be relevant for consideration of a proportionality in design that is exhibited and highlighted in the pro-portions of the Greenway antipodean architecture that is our heritage, reliant upon Isaac Newton’s promotion of the ancient provenance and precision of english measures as basis for a universally applicable metric standard of measurement that illustrates and depends from the physical and architectural relevance of phaenomena of movement. * Villa Almerico-Capra Looking just at the disposition of rooms on the piano nobile, based on Wassell’s measurements: * the central domed room, 30’ in diameter and 55’ in height, presents the converse of Inigo Jones’ and Newton’s English foot / unciae of 0.306m (12 x 25.5mm), in both area and volume. By way of explanation of the significance of such measurement: frequent reference has been made to Morten Herman’s assessment of the importance of the ratio 1: 2.55 for appreciation of Greenway architectural design. The issue relies on the trigonometrical importance of the angle 36o in egyptian mathematics Metrologist Livio Catullo Stecchini affirms that the egyptians called their country to mera, which he translates as “the land of the mr”, where “the word mr is used to refer to the pyramids, but more specifically it refers to the meridian triangle of a pyramid. whose hypotenuse is the apothem. The mr essentially is a right triangle with an angle of 36o and another angle which of necessity is 54o. Since the Egyptians did not have trigonometric tables, they used this triangle to obtain the value of trigonometric functions. They conceived of this triangle as the basic building block of the cosmos. They used this triangle or modifications of it by a few degrees in geometric constructions, in the planning of buildings, in surveying, and in geography.” Appendix “Notes on the Relation of Ancient Measures to the Great Pyramid” in P. Tompkins, Secrets of the Great Pyramid, New York(Galahad)1997 pp.291-2. In a circuit of 360 o, 255o has 105 o as its co-relative. Volume of the domed room, as venetian feet, presents as a unit in a block or grid of 64: (30’ ÷ 2)2 x  x 55’ = 38,877.20909 c.ft 38,877.20909cubic feet x 0.3476m3 = 104,499.5349m3 ÷ 64; that is, (360,000 m3 - 255,500.4651m3) ÷ 64 = metric volume of the central domed room; implying a foot of 0.3066 units. The Greenway feature 2.55, noted by Morten Herman, implying foot of 0.306m, is, if you like, the southern hemisphere’s counterpart of the northern hemisphere’s 1.05, relative to the figure 3.6; noting that 1.05m presents 2 egyptian royal cubits of 0.525m. Were such to be applied here, volume of the central domed room would present as 39.06 cubic venetian feet, evoking the 39.1m length between the barge boards of the Dormitory at Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK: 105m ÷ 0.3476m3 = 2500.05749c.ft = 39.0633982c.ft x 64. Illustrating the comparative reciprocity or complementarity of standards of measurement, note that: area of a square built upon the base width / depth - which determines the curvature of the room – is 225 square feet; which will be recognised as a numeric of brick proportionality at Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK discussed in relation to the other examples of Palladio’s work, above: (30ft ÷ 2)2 = 225 sq. ft; area of the circle enclosed, as a function of pi as 22/7 presents numeric of the ‘true’ English foot (0.304401m), of mesopotamian origin, covering 30.44058177 square feet: (30.0489ft ÷ 2)2 x 22 ÷ 7 = 709.4503423sq.ft. = (26.63550905ft)2 (26.63550905 x 2) ÷ (28 x 16) = 30.44058177; which as venetian feet present Newton’s longer Cubit of Memphis, and squared as reciprocal of etruscan foot used by Inigo Jones at St Paul’s: 30.44058177feet x 0.3476m = 5.290573112m x 2; (5.290573112m)2 = 0.0357…-1. Volume of the central domed room: (15ft)2 x x 55ft = 38,877.20909 c.ft x 0.34763 = 1632.805233m3. Recall discussion about the 300 feet length of the North Range of Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK and the design’s purposive focus on the transcendental number e; then note that the volume of the central domed room of La Rotonda can be seen to express similar dimensional numeric: 2 x 2.7182818 x 300 = 1630.96908. (1630.96908 ÷ 0.34763 ÷ ÷ 152 supposes height as 54.93815036 (venetian)feet, rather than 55 feet.) More directly, the volume as 1632.8… m3 expresses a cube of (47.10186672m ÷ 4)3; referring Newton’s ‘middling cubit’ of Herodotus, used at Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK and in other Greenway designs. * the 4 corner rooms present area as 100 of Newton’s calculation of the ‘middling cubit’ or persian cubit of Herodotus: 26’ x 15’ = 390 sq ft = 47.1220464m2 cf. persian cubit in Newton’s Dissertation; and with height as 20.5’, volume = 335.7822782m3 x 4 suggesting volume as 336m3, evoking the mesopotamian shusi standard of barley measures, referenced in Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK, and in the Maltings at Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE. * the 4 small rooms present area as 4 x 165 square (venetian)feet: 15’ x 11’ = 165 sq ft = 20m2 (19.9362504m2) x 4 - cf. english rod as 16.5 english(winchester)feet; whose unciae are determined officially by 3 x 12 juxtaposed grains of barley; and volume as modular component of the note , D, at the heart of the ancient musical scale, if height is 20.5’: 15’ x 11’ x 20.5’ x 0.3476m3 = 142.0617331m3 x 4 (cf. musical Scale, 284.086Hz, frequency of the ‘divine’ Note , D; suggesting the consistency, if not the relevance, of the musical analogy in looking at harmonic proportions. cf. M. O’Halloran, Revisiting the Ancient Musical Scale and the Paradox of Pythagoras, Goulburn 2004 ISBN 0 9581262 3 2, p.99)  Villa Godi In his essay titled “The Problem of Harmonic Proportion in Architecture”, Rudolf Wittkower analyses Villa Godi’s design R. Wittkower, Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanism, being Vol. 10 of The Studies of the Warburg Institute, London(Tiranti)1967 p.129. in terms of a succession of sequences 16, 24, 36, and notes the differences evident in the dimensions of the built work, such that the Portico is 14.9 feet rather than16 feet; with adjacent rooms being 15.5 feet and 17.3 feet. Wittkower is not saying whose feet he is referring. Metric area of the recessed central salon, taken as venetian feet: 36’ x 24’ x 0.3476m2 = (360 – 255.6) m2 = 104.4m2; evoking co-relative of english foot/unciae of 0.306m. Volume of the flat-ceilinged central salon: 24 x 36 x 24 = 20736 = 163 x 5.0625, indicating numeric of barley cubit of 0.50625m, and, from the mason’s viewpoint, a modular volume 2(2048 x 5.0625). Area of the salon is 24 x 36. Ratio of that modular volume and the area introduces a familiar factor, being the numeric of the Greenway name cipher. Volume now presents as 24 x 36 x 24 = 20736 = 163 x 5.0625 = 2(2048 x 5.0625) = 2(24 x 36 x 2.37037 x 5.0625). Noting that 2.37037 x 5.0625 = 12. When the ‘anomalous’ 14.9 figure is introduced, as venetian feet, instead of the barley cubit, the volumetric akin to that of the HYDE PARK BARRACK brick (1060200mm3) emerges: (24 x 36 x 237.037) x (14.9 x 0.3476m) = 1060708.186m; 163 ÷ 2 x (14.9 x 0.3476m) = 1060708.186m; = (25.496m x 4)3; expressing unciae of Jones’ english foot and the supposed Greenway ratio of design. * Portico’s 14.9 units can be read in light of the discussion in relation to the emergent central vent of the Dormitory at Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK, and especially in the context of the volumetric of the brick used in that construction, which affirms the relevance of 4 x 25.5 for both designs (and for Jones’ church of St Paul, given a length of 102 feet). * Adjacent room’s 15.5 venetian feet expresses the relationship between artabic (persian) units (upon which all ancient measures are based) and venetian units, presenting 10 artabic cubits as equal to 15.5 venetian feet. 10 artabic cubits (0.30779567mm x 28 ÷ 16) = 15.49604207 x 0.3476m; i.e. 10 artabic cubits = 15.5 venetian feet; whereas the 17.3 venetian feet width affirms the dimension of the artabic foot itself, as multiple of 16 x 16 x 2: 10 x 307.79567m = (17.29468981 x 0.3476m) x 162 x 2 = 17.29468981 x (0.02370419-1 ÷ 4)2 x 16; (see the Greenway name cipher, discussed in the Villa Foscari design; and note that the ratio of ratios expressed as 2 x 162 ÷ 24 is 21.333, which appears as a height in the Villa Foscari design). The slight discrepancy between whole number rendition and the calculated values given here may well be due to the deficiency in the modern (french)metre; insofar as, for this example: 17.29468981 x 1.000692286 = 17.30666268; etc. Area 15.5 x 24 clarifies the significance of the 46.5’ length of Portia’s hall as referring roman geometric feet: area 15.5 x 24 = 372 = 46.5 x 8 = 2976 ÷ 8; illustrating, in the process, the reciprocal relationship of volumetric equality between the smaller rooms at Villa Foscari and these side rooms at Villa Godi. The seemingly anomalous measurements of the rooms on the piano nobile within Villa Godi, identified by Rudolf Wittkower in the context of his investigation of the applicability of harmonic proportion in Palladio’s architectural design, suggest the relevance of classic standards of measurement for the interpretation of Palladio’s designs as a whole. Although ranking among the earliest of Palladio’s built works, the ‘anomalous’ measurements seen in Villa Godi demonstrate a seamless continuity in elements of design throughout his work, and serve to clarify a seemingly ‘out of character’ aspect apparent in his later work. Emergence of these same elements of design in the antipodes, within the portfolio of Greenway design, is startling, instructive, and generally unappreciated. * As Newton says about his own research laid out in his Dissertation, so here: “Who will therefore imagine, that so many dimensions not at all depending upon each other, should correspond by mere chance with the length of the Cubit assigned by us?” (410) I hope you have enjoyed this comparative excursus into the wonderful world of Greenway design, and that it stimulates further inquiry. (See Common themes in design here) (See Summary of argument here) The Frame of Time: First & Last Ratios of Greenway Architectural Practice in Antipodes Sydney’s HYDE PARK BARRACK & Goulburn’s BRADLEY GRANGE 1 Antonia Clarkeson Copyright 2018