ARCHITECTURE. 



htnity in their structure. In the erection 

 of these edifices, heavy cornices, entabla- 

 tures, and lintels, were omitted, and there 

 was seldom occasion to use any stones 

 larger than a man might carry on his 

 back, up a ladder, from one scaffold to 

 another, though spoke wheels and pullies 

 were occasionally used. From the adop- 

 tion of such light materials, and the emu- 

 lation of the architects, edifices were 

 raised to an incredible height. Hence the 

 lofty towers, and the still more elevated 

 spires that occasion such awful grandeur, 

 and sublime sensations in the mind of the 

 astonished beholder. The ceilings of the 

 churches were formed by groined vault- 

 ing, a portion of the pressure of which 

 was directed in the length to the ends, 

 and the remaining pressure to the spring- 

 ing points on the sides. 



In the Roman buildings the walls were 

 most commonly without projections, and 

 of vast thickness, which was necessary in 

 a vaulted building, erected upon a recti- 

 lineal plan, in order to counteract the ef- 

 forts of the resisting arches. Hence, if 

 the building had been groined, the weight 

 of the arches would have been thrown 

 upon the springing points. From this it is 

 evident that a vast quantity of materials 

 must have been employed without effect ; 

 but this is not the case with the pointed 

 style of architecture, for the walls were 

 thickened by buttresses opposed only to 

 the pressing points ; and, to aid the re- 

 sistance with still more powerful effect, 

 the buttresses were surmounted with 

 high pinnacles, and, from their sloping 

 position, their general form was almost 

 one continued prop, in a straight line to 

 the bottom : this straight line was a tan- 

 gent to the arch. Those that under stand 

 the nature of the centre of gravity will 

 easily perceive, that a plain wall will be 

 overturned with much more ease than one. 

 with buttresses, of the same length and 

 height, the same quantity of materials 

 being employed in both. The extremity 

 of the aisles was sustained by strong pi- 

 lastered buttresses on the outside, and 

 the other extremity rested on the imposts 

 or capitals of the pillars. These pillars, 

 with their superincumbent walls, not be- 

 ing assisted as on the outside with but- 

 tresses, were liable to be bent with the 

 pressure of the arches, unless the sides 

 of the nave had been of sufficient thick- 

 ness, which, in many of our churches, ex- 

 perience has proved to be the contrary, 

 by the bending of the walls inwardly, 

 which is a serious defect, and threatens 

 rujn to many of those venerable piles of 



building. We cannot therefore expect 

 these edifices to rival, in duration, the 

 immortal constructions of Egypt, Greece, 

 and Rome. As to the groining of the 

 nave, the arches were equally resisted on 

 both sides by the flying buttresses, which 

 pressed forcibly at the imposts of the 

 arches. It would appear, that the me- 

 thod practised in the erection of these 

 edifices was, to insert the springing stones 

 as the work went on, but to leave the 

 vaulting to be turned after the walls had 

 been carried up to their full height, and 

 the whole roofed in. The roofs of Gothic 

 buildings were very high pitched, a form 

 more from choice than necessity, rather 

 adopted in compliance with the pointed 

 and pyramidal style of architecture, than 

 rendered necessary by the climate, being 

 generally covered with lead. These roofs 

 are therefore faulty, in burdeningthe walls 

 with an unnecessary load of timber and 

 lead; and they are also deficient in the 

 construction, by the omission of tye- 

 beains, to counteract their tendency to 

 spread and thrust out the walls. 



After having thus discussed the several 

 styles of building, which have been gene- 

 rally and unmeaningly classed under the 

 appellation of Gothic, we must now make 

 a retrogression to Italy, where the Gre- 

 cian style had been revived for a consider 

 able time, and was nourishing in great 

 purity. Let us therefore retrace the steps 

 by which it again rose to its ancient splen- 

 dour and magnificence. 



Fillipo Brunelleschi, born 1377, maybe 

 looked upon as the restorer of ancient ar- 

 chitecture, and the founder of the modern 

 style. 



After having prepared his mind by the 

 study of the writings of the ancient au- 

 thors, and the r.uins of Roman edifices, 

 which he carefully measured, he discover- 

 ed the orders, and recognized the simple 

 forms and constructions of the ancients, 

 and having thus formed a system upon un- 

 shaken principles, he was enabled to con- 

 struct works with beauty, solidity and du- 

 rability. He erected the dome of St. 

 Maria da Fiore at Florence, an undertak- 

 ing beyond the abilities of any other 

 builder then living; Arnolfo, the original 

 architect of this vast cathedral, having 

 been two years dead. This dome, rising 

 from an octangular plan, is of great ele- 

 vation, and is only inferior in size to that 

 of St. Peter's. It is constructed by two 

 vaults, with a cavity between them, and 

 was erected without centering. It is the 

 only elevated dome supported by a wall 

 without buttresses. From this, and many 



