2o0 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



July. 



scriiJlioii of 11 clmrfli, finds ;\llc}ifories thvouglnml. The four \\;ills ar« 

 the foui' cimlinal virtues. By the windows the Scriptures are repre- 

 sented. The oohimns figure the Doctors; the steeples are Prelates : 

 and he ascends unto tlie weathercock, which lie turns into a tali> of 

 my^^teiy. It is not necessary to endue porches and steeples with this 

 Icind of reverence ; but still it is not proper to innovate by nuitilafiiig 

 the building of its accustomed members. The influence of visible ob- 

 jects over the mind cannot be resisted, and the absence of architec- 

 tural costume, if we may so express ourselves, completely destroys the 

 dignity of the building. 



In the disposition of the interior, modeni architects vary from the 

 proper ecclesiastical arrangements, in a very unjustifiable manner. It 

 is scarcely possible to create a more palpable blemish than that which 

 is occasioned by placing the (lulpit in the centre of the nave. In a 

 dissenting meeting-house, it may be proper to assign this station to 

 the preacher, but it is quite inconsistent with the intent of our liturgy, 

 and should never be tolerated. The situation of the reading-desk 

 below the pulpit, like tire desk of an auctioneer's clerk, is equally uu- 

 appropriate. An organ and an organist over the altar must also be 

 considered as an inexiaisable violation of the decency of the building. 

 By considering the plans of the earlier Christian churches, many use- 

 ful hints may be obtained, particularly respecting the situations to lie 

 assigned to (he ministers and the congregation. Much information on 

 this subject is collected in the "Origines Ecclesiasticce" of Bingham, 

 a writer vvlio does equal honour to the English clergy and to the 

 English nation, and wdiose learning is only to be equalled by his mode- 

 ration and impartiaUty. 



Ornaments may be soberly and discreetly introduced. When an 

 altar-piece is admitted, it should never be mounted in a fine guilt frame 

 and considered as a piclure. In every public building, and, perhaps, 

 in most private habitations, jiaintings or statues should never bear the 

 appearance of pieces of furnilure. They should never look like things 

 mIucIi can be put up and taken down at pleasure. The effect produced 

 by such works of art is materially diminished if they seem to be 

 sti'angers and brought in merely for show. They then are redundant 

 epithets in the ii'or/i; which it would be better to expunge. On the 

 otlier liand, their value is greatly increased when they have the dis- 

 tinctive character of being required by the predetermined plans of the 

 architect ; and indeed they should never be treated otherwise tlian as 

 ancillary to the architecture. Even the clock, which is usually produc- 

 tive of so much unpicturescjue deformity in our steeples, might, if the 

 architect considered it, bear the appearance of belonging to him, instead 

 of being supplied "as per order of vestry" by the manufacturer. In 

 the Flemish churches, instead of the solid shining black face and smart 

 gilt numerals, the architects employ large rings or circles of bronze, 

 between w Inch the figures, cut out of plates of the same metal, are 

 fixed. This open-worked metallic tracery agrees completely with the 

 stone tracerv, and does not obscure any part of the architecture. A 

 figure of the sun, the measurer of time, is sometimes placed in the 

 centre of the inner circle, which it supports by its rays, and when 

 colouring was required, the architects used azure, the tint of the celes- 

 ial sphere. 



Most of our modeni churches have a mean appearance in consequence 

 of their want of elevation ; they seldom range higher than the adjoin- 

 ing houses. As long as the custom of depositing the dead in vaults 

 shall continue to prevail, we may add to the grandeur of the building 

 without increasing the expense. The body of the church might be 

 made to stand upon an undercroft, the pavement whereof should not be 

 more than one or two feet below the level of the adjoining ground. 

 This crvpt might be divided into sepulchral clia])els, and the monies to 

 be raised by the sale of the right of interment to families would go in 

 aid of the building funds. No church should be without a lofty steeple. 

 The "beaven-direcled spire" has a sacred dignity which should never 

 be sacrificed exeept under the pressure of the most imperious neces- 

 sitty. 



There is considerable diffioulty in combining a steeple with the 

 orders of Grecian or Roman architecture. Wren mastered the difll- 

 culty, and produced combinations scarcely inferior to the Gothic. The 

 Grecian or Roman steeple appears worst and ugliest, when, as at St 

 Martin's in the Fields, it is seen riding athwart a Corinthian portico, t 

 o 



lipluras divin2e, qurr vcntum ct pluviam rcpc-llunt : id est, nociva prohiljcnl' 

 pt, (lum claritatem vcri solis. id est, Dei, in peclesiam, id est in rorda fidclium 

 transmitlunt, inhabitantes ilkiminant. Hw intus latiorcs sunt quia niyslicus 



sensus amplior est, et pnrcedit literalem Per eancellns vero. qui 



sunt ante fenestras, prophetas vel alios doctores obscures intelligimus ecclesUT 

 mditau es, in quibiis ob duo charitatis pi\pcepfa, quandoque (hive columnie 

 duplicantur, secundum quod Apostoh bini ,id pra'picandum niittuutur ' 



Haiimiale Dlvhiorum OfflciorvM, 1. i. c. 1. The mention of the Heatlldrcock 

 contradicts a common notion, that it replaced ths cro^s Sfter the Beformfttion ; 

 and proves the antiqriity of the custom, 



which it does not bear the slightest affinity; — and best, when, accord- 

 ing to the favourite practice of Palladio, it stands by the side of the 

 edifice as a campanile or bell tower. When so managed, it is grouped 

 with the lines of the building into a pleasing mass, without being based 

 upon a discordant featiu'e. In London we have only one example of 

 this arrangement. It is exhibited in a building which has been scolTed 

 at and scorned, but which, in truth, is one of the most picturesque in 

 the metropolis — the clmrch of St. George, Blooinslniry. Let any un- 

 ]irejudiced observer view the front of this building, divesting himself 

 of traditionary prejudice, and lie will acknowledge the truth of this 

 observation. We will not even censure the statue, which, placed on 

 the summit of llic pyramid, appears to look down like a tutelary saint. 



All things fairly considered, the Gothic style apjiears to be the most 

 reasonable order for an English church. It is consecrated by its asso- 

 ciations, and tlie most ordinary architect may easily leani to avoid any 

 marked impropriety. It should be managed freely, and although we 

 would not admit of any fantastic or capricious alterations of the style 

 as existing in the great master-pieces, with which this island abounds, 

 still the architect sliould not be inhibited from such a discreet power 

 of adaptation as the circumstances of the case may require. Such 

 variations, however, will be very rarely needed, and then only in the 

 disposition of the subordinate parts of the edifice. Our modern work- 

 men are capable of executing the finest ornaments of the Gothic style. 

 Mr. Gayfere's restorations of the front of Westminster Hall, ancl of 

 Henry the Seventh's Chapel, might excite the envy of the most cunning 

 freemason of the elder day. And the science wdiich raised the Water- 

 loo-bridge would enable the architect to groin the loftiest quire. In 

 such of our English Gothic buildings as were erected after the age of 

 Edward I. the drawing of the sculptures is often rude and clumsy : but 

 it is a strange mistake to suppose that when the architect copies the 

 Gothic style, it is also necessary to copy the imperfections resulting 

 from want of skill in a peculiar branch of art. He is under no obliga- 

 tions to reproduce ugliness. Let him take all forms which are beau- 

 tiful, and reject all such as are unpleasing. In the Gothic of France 

 the human figure is often treated wdth remarkable purity of design ; 

 and there is no reason whatever why the statue in a Gothic tabernacle 

 should not have as much elegance as if it were placed in a Roman 

 niche. The costume of the middle ages may be treated with the ut- 

 most elegance. The monumental statues now erecting by Mr. West- 

 macott, for Lord Grosvenor, point out the method in wTiich real classi- 

 cal taste — that is to say, the taste which seeks propriety — may be 

 ap])lied to the Gothic style. If a costume, not being that (if real life, 

 is to be borrowed for our heroic statues, the ancient English state 

 robes have at least as good claims as the Roman mantle, to which they 

 bear a near affinity: and the open crown of Edward the Confessor, 

 encircled by the mystic fleur-de-lis, of which the prototype appears 

 on the monuments of the Pharaohs, would deck the brows of the 

 monarch with full as much grace as the laurel wreaths of the Cssars. 

 With regard to the subordinate tlecorations, it may be remarked tliat 

 painted glass is usually executed upon an erroneous principle. When 

 large plates are used, as by the artists of the Eginton school, they 

 destroy the effect wliicli it is intended they should produce. This art 

 partakes as much of the nature of mosaic as of painting, and it never 

 succeeds except when, as in the excellent productions of the sixteenth 

 century, the figures are formed of pieces adapted to the outline, the 

 lead being lost in the shadows. 



A few words must be said respecting sculpture. We will not call 

 sculpture a cognate art, because it is really ihseparable from architec- 

 ture. We may lament that in the jn'esent age, the professors of the 

 twc) arts are so com]jlefely divt)rced in practice. They were not dis- 

 joined in the good days of Italy, and we have sufficient genius in Eng- 

 land to tempt us to wish for their re-union. In historical and monu- 

 mental scupture a very questionable taste has been fostered by an 

 ill-directed study of the remains of antiquity. Symbolical represenl.i- 

 tions were employed by the ancients, who always understood their 

 work, with a thorough propriety of invention and of conception. 

 Symbolical figures form as definite a mode of conveying ideas as the 

 letters of the alphabet: when combined they form a word and imparl 

 a notion. But the symbols of the classical age are grounded upon a 

 creed wholly foreign to us, and which has reached ns only in disjointed 

 fragments. ' The alphabet has gone out of use, and the language is a 

 dead language; and in its place we mock the ancients by substituting 

 allegorical representations, that is to say, by hewing metaphors in 

 stone, vague, strained, and bombastical, allbrding no satisfaction to the 

 vulgar. 



Artists imagine that they ennoble their work by borrowing ancient 

 costume and attributes; much in the same way as a country school- 

 master keeps up his dignity by making a speech in Latin to the young 

 squire on his birth-day. By these anaclu-onisras, however, they emu- 

 late the absitrdities of the barbarous ages. In the productions, as well 



