ARCHITECTURE. 



ARCHITECTURE. 



tot 



(or pRMrration tad arrangement, U Stonehenge on Salisbury I'laiu in 

 Wiluhirr. Here we find stones, tome uf very Urge dimensions, placed 

 upright in the ground, and forming a series of concentric .-u.-l.-. 

 They are not merely rude mane*, like those of Avebury new Sill.ury 

 Hill, but they hare rvidentlr undergone some shaping ixnd robbing 

 down *o a* to form tolerably regular ]>arallelopipedonB. We here 

 observe also two (tone* placed upright, like post* or pOlara, and 

 another large (tone placed over them like an architrave or lintel : tin- 

 lintel U ali secured by uieaUH of mortises and tenons : all this indi- 

 cate* certainly a regular principle of conBtruction. But, with the 

 OTftfttfn of a few inquirers who are, perhaps, disposed to over-value 

 Celtic remain*, can any careful antiquarian trace the forms uf our 

 oldeat cburcha and other ancient edifices, to the rude masses of the 

 British monumenU in this inland ! It U an historical fact, that the 

 Romans introduced into England their own principlea of building ; and 

 it is equally demonstrable that, with the exception, probably, of the 

 arch, Ropian architecture, as it is known to us, both from existing 

 pqfrmiM and written books, is a modification and adaptation of 

 Grecian architecture ; it was probably introduced among the Romans 

 by Greek*, and certainly generally practised by them .even under the 

 emperors. If we then trace the progress of architectural construc- 

 tion from the Greeks, through the Romans, to its introduction into 

 western Europe, we may fairly assert that the term architecture, in its 

 strictest historical sense, implies the adaptation of Grecian models to 

 the buildings of our own times. 



A building may be well arranged for all purposes of mere con- 

 venience, but U this U all it is not an architectural construction. To 

 POBM*S an architectural character it must combine internal convenience 

 and fitness with beauty of external form, and with durability. If the 

 external arrangement of a building should be compounded of those of 

 several nations, such as Hindoo, Egyptian, and Greek, we should not 

 admit this to be on architectural construction, even if the external 

 form gave pleasure, which, however, is hardly a possible result ; for it 

 is essential to the character of an architectural structure, that the 

 general arrangement and ornament* should have a unity of character 

 and be referable to some one model. 



Architecture arose, in fact, from the combination of sculpture with 

 construction. Jluililiny may be older than sculpture, but sculpture 

 combined with building produced architecture. From the Homeric 

 poems we deduce only very vague ideas as to the structure of temples 

 and palaces ; we find no distinct indication of the arrangement of 

 columns, which are the very essence of Greek architecture. But the 

 art* of design, and even the arts of working in metal, hod attained 

 some excellence. (See in the ' Iliad,' book 18, the description of the 

 shield of Achilles.) We find epithets derived from metal applied to 

 the house of Alcinous and other buildings, from which we infer that 

 they were structures of wood, and that the decorations were of metal ; 

 but we find no trace of columnar arrangement, or of an edifice of 

 stone. (' Odyss.' vii. 84, tea. ; iv. 45, 4c.) Even in the time of Pau- 

 sanias (x. 5, 11) there still existed at Lacediomon the temple of 

 Minerva, called the ' house of copper,' from which it would appear, that 

 this and other ancient temples were mainly of wood, and ornamented 

 with metal 



That the oldest material of sculpture was wood, is a fact in itself 

 probable enough, and attested by the authority of 1'aunaiiias (viii. 17). 

 Many of these wooden statues of high antiquity remained after the 

 wooden temple itself had been exchanged for a more substantial edifice 

 of stone. The ornamental parts of the stone structure, even in their 

 simplest form, were no doubt derived from the art of the sculptor. 

 The sculptor and the architect, in fact, were often united in the same 

 person ; and even when it became usual to separate these art* into two 

 distinct branches, we can have no doubt that the skill of the architect, 

 and the taste, at least, of the sculptor, were generally combined in the 

 ante individual. This was the case also with the medieval architect*. 

 and not lea*t with those of England, who frequently not only adapted 

 the exterior forms of their edifices for the reception and display of 

 culpture, but had good ta*to enough to take care that these ornaments 

 were in harmony with the whole design, and worthy of the edifice 

 which was to receive them. 



Further it is worthy of remark, though it seems to have escaped the 

 observation of many writers, that the nation to which Europe is indebted 

 for UM element* of its architecture is also the nation to which we are 

 indebted for our knowledge of geometry. That law of the mind which 

 gave birth to the simple forms of the triangle, the circle, and the square, 

 gave to man the element* of all his works of art. We are not aware of 

 any nation that ha* bad a system of architecture which has not also 

 had a style of sculpture ; nor do we know of any nation that bu carried 

 architecture to perfection, or even to a degree of excellence in it* kind, 

 that ha* not also had a system of geometry and arithmetic. 



W bar* endeavoured briefly to (how, what we believe to be strictly 

 demonstrable, that the term architecture, AiVonVaV.y explained, is the 

 mod* of constructing edifice* which we have received from the Romans 

 and UM Grwlu. But with the establishment of Christianity, and It* 

 diffusion over western Europe, i gradual modification was made in the 

 form* of buildings devoted to religious worship : for it must be ob- 

 served, that it is principally in tho religious edifices of a nation that we 

 bnd the MMOtial principle, of it* architecture exhibited and preserved. 

 Tbi remark appli*. with qual truth to all nations that hav. lft 



Miiiid them example* of some definite style of building. The great 

 ecclesiastical structure* of western Europe now exhibit a charn< I 

 appearance very different indeed from the models of Greek and Roman 

 ouiMingit. They gradually deviated from the heavy and rounded V - 

 man arch, tli< . liich i iiiidouM< i dly the Roman arch, ( the 



ixiinted and light conHtructions generally d< -nominated the << 

 That foreign ornament* of a barbarous or at least incongruous stylo 

 were occasionally mingled with them by the numerous architect* of 

 the middle ages, cannot be denied ; but still in the early ecclesiastical, 

 and also in many of the civil structures of Italy, Germany, France, 

 Flanders, and England, a distinct and new character of architecture 

 may be seen; and this distinction became again so mark I in the 

 -.-v. i.il countries < that the Gothic or pointed stylos of 



England and various Continental countries have each a distinctive, 

 character, though they may all have had a common origin. 



The architecture of a people IB on important part of their lr 

 It is the external and enduring form of their pulilic life ; an index, of 

 the state of knowledge and social progress. Architecture, therefore, 

 to be understood aright, must be considered historically ; must be con- 

 sidered, that is, in connection with the whole public and social life ,,i 

 the several nations in which it has been practised, and the particular 

 times and circumstances in which it flourished. The architecture of 

 the ancient Greeks, or that of the various European nations during the 

 middle age, would be very imperfectly understood if the architec- 

 tural remains were studied apart from the external and inner I 

 of the countries in which they ore found. On the other hand, the 

 existing edifices serve to illustrate and elucidate much that would, 

 without their assistance, be but imperfectly comprehended. 



No national architecture has ever been self-originated or in\ 

 The architecture of every age and country where true architecture has 

 existed, has grown out of some previous architecture. The architecture 

 of Greece, the purest architecture which the world has ever seen, m iy 

 be traced bock to Assyria and Egypt. Tho architecture of Home was 

 derived immediately from Greece. The Oriental imagination trans- 

 formed this into Byzantine ; the Occidental into Romanesque ; and 

 borrowing something from both of these, the mind of the Kith cen- 

 tury produced the Pointed or Gothic style, which the architects of 

 Italy, Germany, France, and England, modified to suit the wont* and 

 characters of their respective countries. 



But always it was a modification, adaptation, or development of a 

 previous system, not a reproduction of it. No true architecture h.ix 

 ever been merely mimetic. Though the architecture of Greece <L 

 its germ from Egypt and Assyria, it developed into its perfect lie.uity 

 and suitableness only by the free influence of the Greek mind. So that 

 of Rome owed whatever of beauty and fitness it possessed to its 

 departure from, not to its conformity with the Greek type. So what- 

 ever there is of grandeur and glory in the wondrous Gothic of the. 

 middle ages, dates from it* emancipation from the classic form. No 

 imported architecture has ever been lasting. In our own count ry 

 have tried this, and the failure is palpable. Our architects have erected 

 copies of the temples of Greece and Home, alike for churches, museums, 

 and town-halls : and, however much they may have been admired 

 whilst the fashion lasted, and scholars imbued with classic ideas gave 

 tone to public opinion, almost before they were finished, the fashion 

 passed away, and they are now regarded with 'general dissatisfaction. 

 To the Greek succeeded the Gothic, and though the passion for it ! 

 still fervid, the opinion < evidently fast gaining ground, that Gothic 

 reproduction is as essentially vicious and untrue as that which it has 

 mpplaataC 



In fact, we may hope that we are in this country coming to under- 

 stand tliat whilst an absolutely new style is a thing neither to be desired 

 nor looked for, and that an eclectic style is on absurdity, the archi- 

 tecture of every age a* well as every country, to be a true living 

 architecture, must bo a product of that age and country adapted 

 to its special wants, and circumstances, and character : developed 

 out of some previously existing architecture, but adapted with perfect 

 freedom to present purposes, and embodying to the fullest possible 

 extent the scientific knowledge and artistic feeling of the present 

 time. 



And if this be so, the question of style will eventually, perhaps at 

 no very distant day, settle itself. It will be felt that in every 

 building there is a matter to be determined antecedent to all con- 

 siderations of style. The first grand requisite in, as Vitruvius long 

 ago pointed out, that a building shall be designed so a* to answer as 

 perfectly as possible the purpose for which it is erected : shall, in 

 other words, possess the greatest attainable convenience and stability. 

 When that is arrived at, the feeling for beauty and grandeur in the 

 architect who has rightly studied his art, will suggest a style an 

 outward and visible clothing of the actual body which shall be as 

 evidently in conformity with it, and the most beautiful, because the 

 most suitable, for it be as properly adapted to th; purpose it has 

 to fulfil, and the locality in which it is placed as the form and 

 clothing and colour of an animal or a flower are recognised to be the 

 most beautiful as well as the most suitable with which it could have 

 been endowed. 



Ornament then is an essential part of architecture. Without 

 ornament there is no true architecture, only building. But it is a 

 misconception of th* true purpoM of art to say that an edifice is 



