1848.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



K9 



had in modifying his opinions on the subject. In the meantime, although 

 he could nut say this theory accounted satisfactorily for every phenomenon 

 connected with beauty of form, it seemed to him to account for far more of 

 them '"lan any other he had yet met with. 



As the fourth branch of the subject, he slated the nature of the theory 

 under consideration, and attempted lo show the fallacies contained in it, 

 and in all others of a similar nature which attributed beauty to proporliua. 

 The grand principle of this theory — that by which it must stand or fall — 

 appeared to be (p. 66, Symmetrical Beauty), that there exists in the 

 human mind "an universal inherent mathematical principle of harmony 

 which gives a response to every development of its laws, whether in 

 Bound, form, or colours." He devoted some time to the consideration of 

 this faculty. His arguments went to prove, that if such a faculty existed, 

 it could be nothing else than what is commonly called instinct. To combat 

 this idea, he quoted a motto from Mr. Hay's publication on Form, itself a 

 quotation from Burke : — " Wherever the best tasle differs from the worst, 

 I am convinced that the understanding operates, and nothing else." He 

 argued, if the faculty by which we distinguish the musical intervals be that 

 by which we become sensible of the beauty of form, the result is inevit- 

 able, — that all animals, such as the mocking bird, which can distini;uish 

 these intervals and follow tliem, must be conscious of the beauty of form 

 also. He stated that the only proof advanced in favour of this theory was 

 drawn from analogy, because wc find the harmonic ratios are necessary 

 to the primary beauty of a musical chord. These ratios have been ap- 

 plied to form, as being necessary to constitute its beauty also. He argued, 

 if we are to conclude that these ratios are necessary to constitute the 

 beauty of form, simply because we find they are so lo the primary beauty 

 of a musical chord, we must, on the same grounds, conclude they are neces- 

 sary to the objects of the other senses ; but that this would involve the ab- 

 surdity of attempting to account, on mathematical principles, for the same 

 man partaking with equal relish of things sour and sweet, salt and fresh, — 

 eating pickles lo his animal food one day, and currant jelly the next ; for 

 an European lady preferring the scent of aromatic vinegar lo asafoetida, 

 while some tribes of savages infinitely prefer the latter. He spoke at 

 some length on what he conceived to be the unphilosophical nature of such 

 a mode of establishing a theory. What is true in regard to a theory 

 founded on the science of acoustics, may be, and is indeed likely t>> be, 

 utterly false when applied to and founded on the laws of perspective. 

 A sound always reaches the ear precisely of the same pitch as it left the 

 sounding body, while a form makes a different impression on the eye with 

 every change of position. Thus, supposing Ibe beauty of the Parthenon 

 to depend, as asserted by the theory under consideration, on the harmony 

 of the diagonals drawn within the various rectangles which can be de- 

 scribed within the building, it could not in reality be beautiful at all, as 

 there is no point from which all these diagonals could possibly be presented 

 to the eye in their true position. Even standing immediately in front of 

 the building, the diagonals drawn in the rectangles between the nearest 

 columns would necessarily present to the retina a much more acute angle 

 with their base line than those farther removed. Take one step to the 

 right hand or the left, and the angle of 75 becomes one of 76 or 77, and so 

 changing with every step until the columns are seen close together, and 

 every one of these angles becomes a straight line. 



Mr. Purdie followed this with some remarks tending to prove the fallacy 

 of all theories which assume proportion as their basis. How could any 

 such a theory account for the beauty we discover in a human figure and in 

 ahorse? Yet the principle must be the same, by our recognising beauty 

 in styles of architecture so various that some of them seem to be beautiful 

 from the want of qualities which some of the others possess — as the Moorish, 

 the Grecian, the various kinds of Gothic, and Elizabethan; none of them 

 having a single feature in common, either in their proportions or their details. 

 That these differences are not confined to the dilferent orders, but exist in 

 various examples of the same order, — a drawing was exhibited of four 

 specimens of Corinthian : from the Choragic monument in Athens — the 

 temples of Jupiter Slator and Tonans, in Rome— and of Vesta at Tivoli ; 

 all exceedingly beautiful specimens of the order, but without a single 

 feature in common, either in their proportions or details. He adverted to 

 the universal agreement as to the fundamental principles of harmony in 

 music, and the proverbial differences on the most fundamental paints as to 

 beauty of form — lo our recognising beauty in the figure and dress of a mo- 

 dern belle, and our considering it an outrage on taste to transfer the same 

 costume to marble, although the same form and face be preserved. The 

 origin of our feelings, he said, is here too obvious to escape notice. A 

 statue lives a thousand years, a man threescore. Our taste fur sculpture 

 has been modelled on that of antiquity, and cannot now change. Our 

 dresses last not a lifetime, but must be changed as necessity requires. 

 Makers of them will exercise their skill and ingenuity in devising new 

 forms — hence change of fashion ; and hence our ideas also change, and 

 attach themselves to those forms with which we are in the habit of asso- 

 ciating all that is graceful and elegant. A modern statue, even in a 

 modern costume, would, in ten years, address us in antiquated language, 

 without having the respect due to antiquity. The Grecian statues speak 

 to us in a dead language which changes not, and they speak to us of hoar 

 antiquity — of the knowledge, the skill, the taste, and the cultivation to 

 which that wonderful people had attained,aad from whom they are descended 

 to us. 



Mr. Purdie concluded his paper by characterising all attempts to eslablish 

 a theory on such grounds as this, in the words of Lord Jeffrey, as " dog- 



matising from a few examples, instead of defining any general comprelien" 

 sive principle, jii wlncli all beauty may be supposed essi*ntially to consist.'' 

 An attempt, be continued, as reasonable, and of precisely the same nature, 

 as that of a man who, setting out with the premises that every oak tree is 

 a vegetable, attempts therefrom to prove that every vegetable must be an 

 oak tree. 



Mr. Purdie then intimated that he would be prepared, in the second 

 part of his paper, to go somewhat more into detail, and to prove the fallacy 

 of the tlieory from its own inherent defects and self-cunliadictioiis ; for of 

 these he conceived it contained sufficient for the purpose, although he 

 might have failed in convincing any one on the general question. 



Part II. 

 Mr. Purdie commenced the second part of his paper by recapitulating 

 shortly the contents of the first. He then proceeded to explain the scope of 

 the theory he had undertaken to refute. It was intended to be applied to 

 universal nature. This was sutiiciently shown by the " universal mathema- 

 tical principle of harmony" assumed to be "inherent in the mind," for tli« 

 purpose of giving a response to the laws of the theory. It followed that no 

 object could be beautiful in which those principles mere not developed. He 

 quoted two passages from Mr. Hay's book on Symmetrical Beauty as still 

 farther explaining this, and showing how these laws are extended to univer- 

 sal nature. — " In these" (the organic forms of nature) "the first principles 

 of symmetrical beauty are so blended with the picturesque, and operate in a 

 manner so exquisitely refined and subtile, that mankind have as yet been 

 unable to systematize them."— p. 2. " In compositions of high art, the 

 principles of symmetriral beauty are so subtilely imparted as not to exhibit 

 themselves."— p. 4. To these he requested particular attention, this being 

 the point at which all such theories fail, i. e. in the attempt to account for 

 beauty of dissimilar or of opposite descriptions, — such, for example, as that 

 which we discover in a child and in a full-grown man — in a horse, a New- 

 foundland dog, or a greyhound ; or a building — Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, 

 Elizabethan, or Gothic. He said this was a mere begging of the question, 

 a counterpart of Alexander the Great's mode of unloosing the Gordian knot. 

 It would make the principles of this theory to be somewhat like the music 

 of the spheres — filling heaven and earth with their strains — strains so " ex- 

 quisitely refined and subtile," as to be altogether imperceptilile to moral 

 ears. Would not the natural conclusion rather be — " De non apparentibus 

 et non exisientibus eadem est ratio V' It was admitted these principles of 

 symmetrical beauty did not show themselves in works of high art. The 

 admission was correct. They did not show themselves — only because they 

 did not exist. Mr. Purdie next referred to the Parthenon, whose propor- 

 tions it was attempted to show were in accordance with the principles of the 

 theory. In making the attempt, however, it was admitted that several 

 " discords" existed — the outer intercolumniations being closer than the 

 others. It is attempted to get rid of this difficulty by saying that the outer 

 intercolumniatlons are relieved against the sky, while the others are seen 

 against the body of the building — that an open space between two columns, 

 seen against the sky, appears wider than when seen against a background in 

 shade; and this assists in harmonising them. 



Mr. Purdie then showed, from the ground plan of the building, that there 

 is visible a space of only two feet through the outer intercolumniation, while 

 nearly four feet can be seen through that next it. This, therefore, instead of 

 assisting the theory out of its dilemma, only increased the difliculty. Be- 

 sides, a glance at the ground plan would have shown that the same inter- 

 columniation was applied to the inner row of columns, which were so close 

 to the building, they could never be seen against the sky at all. He then 

 explained the reason usually assigned for the nature of the intercolumniation 

 used in Grecian Doric, which is connected with the arrangement of the 

 triglyphs and metopfe. He said, Mr. Hay stated that the line of the tym- 

 panum formed with its base an angle of 15 deg. ; that " as the angles of the 

 pediment in Plates 6, 7, and 15 (of Stuart's Athens) all ditler," he "adopted 

 that of the latter, as being the most likely to be correct, because the pedi- 

 ment is there given by itself." — (Symmetrical Beauty, p. 72). Mr. Purdie 

 showed, by reference to the text of Stuart's Athens, that Plate 15 did not 

 refer to the dimensions of the pediment at all, but was only intended to con- 

 vey an idea of the sculpture, and was given without measurements. The 

 measurements were correctly given on the elevation, — although the elevation 

 itself was not in accordance with them. By a calculation made from these 

 measurements it would be found to form an angle of 13 deg. 2-1 min. There 

 was a statement in the text, noticing the inaccuracy of the elevation. The 

 real angle was there stated to be 14 deg. If the rest of the angles given 

 had been taken from the elevation by means of the protractor, as they ap- 

 peared to have been, they must be all wrong together, as the tympanum, as 

 there represented, is 18 inches too low. 



This was the second attempt made to set the Parthenon to music. The 

 first was proved and acknowledged to be a failure. Of that attempt the 

 jithenaum remarked, June 10, 1843 — " It is easy to see that a general no- 

 tion of this kind is a most insufficient basis even for a plausible theory. * * 

 Mr. Hay is wrong when he asserts that certain proportions are beautiful be- 

 cause they are those of the notes which, in all the combinations of harmony 

 and melody of sounds, are most pleasing. His proportions as assigned to 

 form are most correct and most beautiful. They are not, however, those of 

 the beautiful sounds to which he assigns them." 



The Grecian Doric, therefore, was not in accordance with the principles of 

 this tlieory. Perhaps the attempt might be more successlul when tried with 



