1S-!0.1 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



355 



lows tlirtt, if Bnbylon displaveri the arch in her magnificent works, long 

 before Romiihis flourished, ihen Rome must (if she is to share in the 

 discovery of its properties), at least yield in the antiquttrj of her claim 

 to that of the Assyrian capital. 



Then another question arises out of this. Can the statement of 

 Livy be coirect ? May not the cloaca maxima be as Ferguson hints 

 in his Roman Republic, the relics of some great city, on the ruins of 

 wliich Romulus pitched and settled. That-the arch existed in As- 

 syria is, as far as nice authorities are concerned, certain. That two 

 countries might discover a grand principle in construction at distinct 

 times, \s possiblt — but that the arch is exclusively of eastern origin, is 

 mort than probable. To say nothing of the magnificence of such a 

 work as the cloaca maxima, in the ruder times of a republic, unequalled 

 iis it was in the time of Augustus, there are those \vho countenance 

 the idea of a city on tlio site of Rome long before the time of Romu- 

 lus. Virgil alludes to this ; for Evander, in speaking to -Eneas, is 

 made to say : 



"Hffic duo prffiterea disjectis oppida muris 

 Reliquias veterumque vides monumenta virorum : 

 Hanc Janus pater, hanc Satumus cundidit urbein, 

 Jauiculum huic, illi fuerat Saturuia nomen." — M^. viii, 355. 



In another passage Virgil again alludes to this, and presumes it of 

 Lydian extraction: 



" Ubi Lydius arva, 

 Inter opima virilm leni fluit agmina Tybris." 



In looking into the history of Lydia, we discover that Ninus, who 

 married Seniirauiis (the probable author of the hanging gardens,) sub- 

 dued the Lydians about 1232 years B.C., and it is probable that, when 

 his second son Ezron became the king, the arts of Babylon might have 

 crept after him, and thus the arch might have travelled with he Ly- 

 dian colonists. Then, again, there are those who contend the arch 

 was unknown in Greece till within a hundred years of the Christian 

 aera. So that if Rome were its original source, it would seem much 

 more reasonable to expect its application at an earlier period, since 

 we discover the arch, even in China, in familiar and extensive use at 

 a very early period. 



Such are the doubts, I humbly oflfer to the curious antiquary, and 

 without prejudice to the pretensions of Rome, would add, that there 

 seems a disposition in us to fancy that great city to be the cradle of 

 this important principle in construction, since in Rome we find its 

 boldest application. Existing evidences, too, carry us back into times 

 so remote, that we yield insensibly to this malerial impression, and 

 hush all whispers of record and history in behalf of claims, vv-hen no 

 remains of the past confirm them. Perhaps an abler hand than mine 

 may yet clearly prove these suggestions, and discover Tarquin the 

 elder, in his attempts to drain the city, as the finder of a hidden won- 

 der, and nut as the introducer of a novel discovery ; whilst Tarquin 

 the proud may appear only applying to the magnificence of Rome the 

 skill of an earlier day — worthy, however, of praise for the ingenuity 

 which detected, and the bold promptitude which applied it to the 

 improvements of Rome, 



Frederick East. 

 Sept. IQt/i, 18-10. 



THE NELSON MONUMENT. 



There seems to be a pretty strong feeling entertained against 

 Railtou's Corinthian Column; and it is to be hoped that such a hack- 

 neyed and tasteless object will never be erected as a munumeat to 

 Nelson, for in reality, it will prove a disgrace to Brittish art. 

 Even at this eleven'.h hour it will be better for the parties more im- 

 mediately concerned, to make the best of a bad bargain, and to put up 

 with the loss of the money already thrown away, than obstinately to 

 persist in completing an absurdity, because it happens to have been 

 begun. The Nelson Committee ought rather to think themselves 

 fortunate in having a very good excuse for even yet re-tracing their 

 steps, and thus sparing themselves the obloquy, and art the discredit, 

 that must else redound to them from such a puerile monstrosity. 



Are we never to profit by experience, however dearly bought ? — 

 Must we continue to doom ourselves, time after time, to the sneers 

 and reproaches directed against our blunders in nearly all matters of 

 taste, by other nations ? 



Some may perhaps, be of opinion that quite enough has been said 

 upon the subject already, and that any further remonstrance would be 

 useless. We however, tliink very dilferently, being persuaded in our 

 own mind, that it is mainly owing to want of detern)ined perseverance 

 in remonstrance, that so many abortions in architecture are inflicted 

 upon this couutry. Or are we to be told that there is no public opinion 



whatever worth attending to in such matters ? — that there does not as 

 yet exist among us even one class of persons that can justly be con- 

 sidered as forming an architectural public? If such be reallv the 

 case, the next question is, are we ever likely to have one ? 



As to the Nelson bore, — for sucli it now turns out to be, — there was, if 

 we mistake not, a good deal said beforehand in the newspapers rela- 

 tive to the talent that would be elicited by the Competition. Talent, 

 forsooth! Well, if there was talent, the Nelson Committee had cer- 

 tainly not nous enough among all of them, to find it out; else never 

 would they have pitched upon such a miserable ^;s alkr as they have 

 done. — Should the Column — as we devoutly hope it will not — e'ver be 

 erected, at all events a statue personifying'the Collective Taste of the 

 Committee ought to be clapped on the summit of it. Verily it de- 

 serves to be extolled and in no other way. 



THE NELSON MONUMENT. 



Sir — I am desirous of addressing you upon the subject of the proposed 

 Nelson Monument ; feehng that an unaccountable etfort being now apparent 

 to render our metropolis a laughing-stock to foreigners, it is a duty of every 

 lover of art to raise his voice, however feeble, for the warding otf of tlie im- 

 pending calamity. I will for the most part confine myself to the examina- 

 tion of the question, whether an isolated column can with propriety be em- 

 ployed. Columns at first rude in execution, were erected by tlie ancients as 

 actual supports to horizontal entablatures, and indeed according to one theory, 

 that of Leljrun, we may say tliat their proportions, chosen as producing the 

 most beautiful etfect, were also those best calculated to ensure stabihty. The 

 epistyha being of great length, the supports or columns were corbelled out at 

 the top, with a \iew to shorten the part unsupported, and thus was invented 

 the capital. It is erroneous, accorcUng to Sir William Chambers, and all other 

 great artists, to employ ornaments which have not the semblance, at least, 

 of utility, and if this excellent maxim be observed, we shall not admire a 

 statue whose features cannot be distinguished, a capital without an archi- 

 trave, and a column with nothing to support, and in fact, as I have heard it 

 said, we might with as much propriety erect a colossal representation of the 

 leg of our great hero. But, I am aware, there is yet a powerful argument 

 in favour of isolated columns, viz. that they were employed by the ancients. 

 But those who favour this opinion surely forget, that though in the columns 

 of Trajan and Antoninus, the impropriety stUl exists, it is almost obscured by 

 the ornaments and the spiral basso-relievos which, twining round the shafts, 

 destroy in a considerable measure the idea of support. The object of the 

 Roman structures could not be mistaken, they are evidently monuments; but 

 the proposed erection will never have other than the appearance of a luige 

 fac-simile of a small column. Surely some who argue that Roman precedent 

 is sufficient to prove the proposed structure beautiful, pass over the numerous 

 instances in which Roman artists have tortured and debased their plundered 

 architecture. They it was, who totally ruined the proportions of the Doric 

 and Ionic orders, who introduced broken entablatures and overloaded cor- 

 nices, who placed order above order, and who set the order upon a lofty 

 pedestal, and crushed it with a ponderous attic. 



The truth of the saying of Aristotle, let us all hope will be marufested, 

 and that "the people" will prove that they are the best judges of whatever 

 is " graceful, harmonious or sublime," and I am confident that the best re- 

 sults would Bave followed, if t/iei/ had been allowed, in the first instance, to 

 give judgment between the competing designs. Amidst the general apathy, 

 whilst the column is actually being commenced, an important Journal, Sir, 

 like your's, should raise its voice, and you will therefore pardon, I hope, my 

 trespass on so much of your space. 



I am. Sir, very obediently, your servant, 



A Lover of the Beaotiful. 



47, Lower Stamford-street. 



COMPARISON OF STONE AND BRONZE STATUES. 



Sir — I observe with regret, that the statue for the summit of the Nelson 

 column is to be of stone, from the very nature of that material it is impossible 

 to make a statue which can look well in such a position, and this for reasons 

 which I think have been overlooked, not only where statues of bronze have 

 been placed on columns, but also in the majority of bronze statues erected 

 in our public places. An error in judgment and in taste is observable in 

 these, which becomes particularly offensive when a statue is placed on the 

 summit of a column, and it arises from not considering the nature of the 

 material em|)loyed. Bronze statues are, in our times, executed on the same 

 principles of composition adopted in marble statues, from the necessities of 

 the latter material. A glance at the arrangement of bronze statues amongst 

 the ancients may assist us in determining what principles of composition 

 should be followeil ; in these we find that trunks of trees, masses of drapery, 

 and the various contrivances necessary to strengthen marble statues, and onlij 

 tolerated because ne essary, are entirely dispensed with, and where drapery 

 is essential to the subject, it descends in peculiarly hght folds, and is gene- 

 rally tighened round the ancles, every advantage of the material being taken 



