58 Mr, E. B, Denison, [Feb. 11, 



divisions are not intended for sham "stones at all, but are only " sug- 

 gestive of construction," and he cannot fail to admire it besides as a 

 refined and highly inventive specimen of architectural polychromatics. 

 I know perfectly well that Mr. Scott's last book indicates that there 

 is some old authority for something of this kind. There always is for 

 the worst things that are done. And considering the discrimination 

 with which the one ridiculous or feeble example is generally selected 

 for imitation out of a hundred good ones, the eclectic theory (which is 

 one of the latest fashions of the season) seems likely to introduce us to 

 some very striking novelties indeed. 



I am not sure that I know what that imposing, but only plagiarised 

 phrase, " the architecture of the future" means ; and even those who 

 are fondest of using such pieces of cant magniloquence have not always 

 a very distinct apprehension of their own meaning ; but I am tolerably 

 certain that if it means a style of architecture which is to last as long as 

 the shortest of the old styles, or to have any chance of being treated 

 with respect, or looked at with satisfaction when the future has become 

 the past, as all the genuine styles of old still are, it must be something 

 very different from what is contemplated by our present seers. Vitru- 

 vius, the great authority on the classical styles, is quoted by Evelyn as 

 saying that among the twelve things which an architect ought to know 

 is astrology. I wonder from what signs it is divined that a new archi- 

 tecture, to be celebrated in future ages as the Victorian style (for so it 

 has been already christened by persons who are too impatient even to 

 postpone that ceremony till the usual time), is so near the ascendant 

 now. I cannot help thinking that we are more likely to glide into a 

 new style (if there is ever to be one again deserving the name) by learn- 

 ing first to stand a little more firmly on the old ground, from which 

 most people now agree that we must take our start, before we are in 

 such a hurry to take it. If the new style is to be a composite one, it 

 is not very likely to be developed except by men who show by their 

 works that they are thoroughly master of the others from which it is to 

 be compounded. We are a little too ready to assume that a knowledge 

 of dates and facts aad measures, and all the history of architecture, 

 (which is probably greater now than ever,) is a proof of a practical 

 mastery of principles : but knowledge is not necessarily power, in spite 

 of competitive examinations. 



The last cause of dissatisfaction with modern Gothic building 

 which I have to notice is of just the opposite kind to that of impatient 

 running after novelties, whether " antiquated novelties," or novelties of 

 invention, which I have been complaining of just now. It is too often 

 forgotten that architecture is not archaeology, nor ecclesiology either ; 

 and many foolish things are set down to the credit or discredit of Gothic 

 architecture, which it has nothing in the world to do with, except that 

 somebody has chosen to embody his own antiquarian or ecclesiastical 

 fancies in a Gothic building. I fully appreciate the obligations of 

 Gothic architecture to the archaeologists, who saved many a fine build- 

 ing from being burnt into mortar like the greater part of that most 



