THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



Still, as the semicircle is by far tlie most advantageous, it ouulit to be 

 retained for them, as might easily be done, should the house itfelf be equal 

 to an entire circle, or so(neivhat more (as is the case at Drury Lane) ; and to 

 effect this, nothings more would be requisite than to omit boxes entirely be- 

 tween tlie chord of the semicircle and the proscenium. Were this done, there 

 would hardly be a seat in any of the boxes th- 1 would not command a suffi- 

 ciently favourable view of the stage ; while, in an architectural point of view, 

 all tlie space so givan up or lost, as perhaps it will be considered, would be a 

 decided gain, because it would afford ample field for decoration in conneiion 

 with and continuation of the proscenium, so that the wliole might be made to 

 form a rich arcliitectural framing to tlic stage; \vhereas, according to the 

 present mode, the connexion between the boxes and proscenium is too abrupt, 

 and can rarely be well managed ; and whenever the boxes ailjoining the stage 

 are comparatively empty, tlicy present a forlorn appearance, which docs not at 

 all reconcile us the better to their being In themselves a drawback on the 

 general design. There would be another advantage arising from the system 

 here recommended, namely, that as far as the boxes are concerned, there 

 would be a sort of neutral territory between the audi3n(e and the stage, highly 

 favourable to scenic eftect and illusion. Every one in the boxes would then be 

 seated where he would behold the stage and performance, not only conveniently, 

 but from a proper distance station. The stage ought to be considered as a 

 picture upon a large scale, and when a man looks at a picture of any dimen- 

 sions, he neither pokes his nose against it nor does he place himself on one 

 side, so as to view it askew, but in such a manner that he can distinctly 

 behold it. In regard to the stage, however, such certainly is not the case 

 with a very large proportion of the spectators in the boxes. Many of them 

 are obliged to take up with places where they cannot possibly see the scene 

 or flat, as it is technically termed, at all, let them twist their necks as much 

 as they will, though en revanche they see a great deal more between the 

 wings and side scenes than is either necessary cr proper. * * 



Weshall here put togethera few particulars relativeto soraeof the principal 

 theatres hitherto erected ; not with the expectation of satisfying the reader, 

 butrathor of inducinj him to prosecute the object fun her by his own researches; 

 and the following table, it is presumed, will be found both interesting and use- 

 ful, as exhibiting a comparative and synoptical view of several of the most im- 

 portant structures of this class : — 



London, — Opera House 



Covent Garden .... 



Drury Lane 



Ne V English Op>;ra 

 Paris. — Opera 



The itre Feydeau . . . . 



Cirque Olympique . . . . 



Bordeaux 



Milan. — La Scala 



Naples. — San Carlo 



Venice. — La Fenioe 



St. Petersburgh 



Berlin 



Hamburgh 



Mentz 



New Orleans 



Dublin 



Birmingham 



Turin 



Ghent 



Feet. 

 102 

 73 

 70 

 57 

 78 

 .52 

 86.6 

 64 

 94 

 90 

 72 

 102 

 61 

 69 

 65 

 73 

 64 

 44 

 66.6 





Feet. 



75 



63 



70 



55 



52 



64 



83 

 62.6 



78 



76 



07 



96 



58 



68 



58 



71 



62 



45 



.52 



68 ! 6U 



Feet 

 40 

 32 

 32 

 32 

 40 

 48 

 44 



39.6 

 44 

 49 

 42 

 52 

 38 

 39 

 38 

 44 

 33 

 28 

 40 

 37 





Feet, 

 35 

 59 



48 



98 



Kfe 



Feet. 



52 



57.6 

 75 

 80 

 49 

 92 

 43 

 56 

 43 

 «S 



Feel. 



56X19 

 90X26 



96 



100X24 

 82X20 

 .56x32 



125X30 



129X25 



82X40 



From this it will be seen that the London Opera House, although of the 

 same extent as the Great Theatre at St. Petersburgh, measured on a line from 

 the curtain to the back of the boxes, is considerably less in its other dimensions, 

 and consequently very dififerent in its proportions ; it being narro.v in compa- 

 rison with its average breadth, owing to which, and to the contraction towards 

 the stage, the greater part of the persons in the boxes are not placed even at 

 right angles to, but actually turned nbliquely from, the stage ; as will be seen 

 by the plan of it, and still more palpably by the section, which shows a consi- 

 derable extent of the side boxes, tvhose fronts would not be visible in such re- 

 presentation were they at right angles with the curtain. .Another great defect 

 is the absence of proscenium, the bo.xes coming quite up to the opening of the 

 stage, in consequence of which prepusterousness in the plan, all architectural 

 e.xpression and propriety are destroyed, and a disagreeable flimsiness takes 

 place, giving to the whole house the appearance of having been hurriedly fitted 

 up for some temporary purpose. Besides which, this immediate contact of 

 stage and box. s would render it almost impossible to cut off the flames from 

 communicating to every part, should a fire break out among the scenery. In 

 Schiiikel's new tlicatr.-, at Berlin, the proscenium is formed by exceedingly 

 massive walls ; and the spectatory itself has the advantage of not being ex- 

 tended greatly beyond a semicircle. Covent Garden partakes in some degree 

 of the faulty plan adopted in the Opera House, aa the boxes between the semi- 



circular portion and the stage are carried, not at right angles to the laiter, hut 

 sloping towards and consequently inclined from it. Had the boxes been con- 

 tinued on the sides for no more than a third of their present extent, this would 

 have been of comparati\ely little moment ; but as these sloping sides are pro- 

 tracted to such a distance that an entire circle might be described between the 

 centre box and the proscenium, the speet.^lors iu the boxes nearest the stago 

 are better stationed for rccomioitering the audience, than for viewing tha 

 scenery or the performance. Therefore, at lea.t three of the boxes on each 

 side should have been shallower than the rest. The plan of Druiy Lane is de- 

 cidedly preferable in every respect to that of ( 'event Garden, as well in the 

 arrangement of the vestibule, staircases, and approaches, as in the form uftho 

 spectatory itself. It would indeed have been better had it not exceeded a per. 

 feet circle, that ii, had the distance from the centre box to the curtain been no 

 more than the diameter of the pit. Yet, notwi hs anding that the general 

 form itself is good, it exhibits an adherence to the erroneous practice of con- 

 tinuing the boxes beyond the semicircle facing the stag<>. \Vc will not be so 

 rigorous as to insist that they should in no degree be suffered to extend beyond 

 th.at diameter or line, but most assuredly, tlie less they were to do so the 

 better. 



We have now extracted al; some length from this admirable work ; 

 but we only fear that, .ilthoiigh at some extent for our columns, not 

 sufficiently to gratify the wishes of the reader. We know, indeed, 

 that although ancient knowledge may be useful as tlie basis of our 

 studies, we shall only be able to carry them on etfectively by attentiorj 

 to the progress of the present. To all those, therefore, who ara 

 desirous of ascertaining the actual state of art in the metropolis, and 

 of availing themselves of it, we can only refer them to this work, 

 which will not only give them food for their observation, but teach 

 them how to exert it. 



It has thus been our lot to criticise a work devoted to criticism, but 

 such is the fate of all publications, and to which our own must sub- 

 mit. Criticism must take its food from everything like death, fur, in 

 the words of Horace — " Pallida mors equo pulsat pede regum turres, 

 pauperas que tiibernas." 



Wefeel h.ippy, however, that, as brethren, it has not been our fate to 

 disagree ; but that on the other hand we are enabled to bear testimony to 

 the correctness with which the editor has carried out the principles 

 declared in his preface. Publishers are but too little looked upon in 

 these things, hut we must bear in mind that they are entitled to some- 

 thing more than the organ-blower's meed. There is much judgment 

 to be exerted in the choice of a work, and often much boldness in the 

 manner in which expense is incurred, and he who well carries out a 

 great work is as well entitled to praise for his discrimination and 

 public spirit as the auihor or editor himself. We are happy, there- 

 fore, in alFording our tribute to the manner in which the publislier has 

 complied with his duty, and not the less so that he has chosen in Mr. 

 Leeds, one whose exertions deserve to merit the confidence of the 

 public as much as his own. 



Collection des principaux Monumens cT Architecture Bizantini, Go' 

 thiqiie, Sj'c, <ie la France. Paris, folio, 1 1 th number. 



Ornemens Classiques exemities d'apres les Peinturei Origimles de 

 Jules Roinain et de ses Eleves. Paris, 4to. 



These publications are the fruits of our Parisian neighbours' raga 

 for the Renaissance. The first is the introductory number of a work 

 on the early architecture of France, and includes the Byzantine, a 

 style of which we know little in England. The second is a collection 

 of the arabesques of Guilio Romano and his pupils ; and they are 

 both works of reference of which we have a deficiency here. 



Herculanum und Pompeii Vollstandiije Sasmmlung der Vis svfden 

 neutigen Tacj dasellst entdecltten Malereien, Bronzen, u. s. w. En- 

 thai tend scmnitHche in der Aiitichila di Ercolano, dem Museo Bor- 

 bonica und dem ubiiyen bisher erschieiien Werkeu, mit Neuern noch 

 vnedirlen Aeqenstanden vermehrt. Von H. Roux et Ad. Bnuchet. 

 Deutuft Vearheilet von Dr. A. Kaiser. (Complete Collection of 

 all the Herculaneum and Pompeian Paintings, Bronzes, Mo.saics, 

 &c., described in the Antiquities of Herculaneum, the Bourbon 

 Museum, and the latest Works. Translated into German from the 

 French of H. Roux, sen., and Ad. Bouchet, by Dr. A. Keiser.) 

 Hamburg : Meissner. 



This splendid work is to be completed in two hundred numbers of 

 four plates each, groat octavo, six of which have already appeared. 

 The first division of the work, containing the paintings, is to consist 

 of architectural ornaments, groups of figures, single figures, fi-iezes, 

 landscapes, and mosaics. The second division includes statues, busts, 

 lamps, &c. The work is cheap and well got up, and cannot fail to 

 promote the knowledge of these elegant styles. 



