1844.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



205 



hinted, it does not consist entirely of the worthies of art. Neverthe 



less, so it is: — Charles Barry has been passed over altogether! 



sort uf omission to be matched only by that of Byron and Canova — 

 two names with which — they being recently dead — all Europe was 

 then ringing — in Crabb's Historical Dictionary, notwithstanding 

 that the work is crammed with hundreds of names now fallen into 

 utter oblivion ! If, however, Charles Barry's fame had not reached 

 Dr. Nagler, thut of another English architect has, and has travelled 

 post-haste to him, without stopping anywhere by the way. Until 

 apprized of the fact by Dr. Nagler, we were not aware that Mr. 

 Leitch Ritchie was an architect ; for we never heard of him but as an 

 Editor of, and writer for Annuals. The pains-taking accuracy which 

 leads him to dub Leitch Ritchie an arcliitect, leads him also to de- 

 scribe Professor Hosking as an engraver! than which blunder he 

 could have committed no graver and more grievous one in that gen- 

 tleman's opinion. 



Out of th'" two Pngin's, the Doctor has contrived to make one, 

 hashing up the father and son together in the most whimsical manner, 

 and s'Tving up to his readers what is a mere tissue of blunders from be- 

 ginning to end. The blunders seem sometimes to be very malicious 

 ones, as for instance, when he calls Gmilt, Guilt, he is thereby himself 

 guilty of a most awkward mistake : — no wonder, therefore, that Gwilt 

 should bear the Germans a grudge. — Britton is described both as an 

 architect and as one of the most learned writers on the subject of 

 architecture — in evidence of which last, perhaps, his unlucky " Dic- 

 tionary " is mentioned as one of his literary achievements. We do 

 not, however, mean to say that he might very well have been omitted 

 — certainly not ; fur in a work of the kind, not only artists alone, but 

 also those who have written and published upon art ought to find a 

 place, and their productions should be recorded. Had, therefore, 

 consistency of plan Ifeen oliserved, we should have had Bentham, 

 Dallaway, Thomas Hope — if only as the author of the " History of 

 Architecture ;" Sir James Hall, on account of his very fanciful but 

 ingenious treatise on Gothic architecture ; and the late J. C. Loudon. 

 The last-mentioned was certainly entitled to notice if only on account 

 of the extensive influence some of his publications have had in popu- 

 larizing the study of architecture. The author of the valuable work 

 on the Picturesque, Sir Uvedale Price, is another who was fairly en- 

 titled to notice as a writer ou esthetics. John Burnet, ;igain, is men- 

 tioned mi rely as an engraver, without a syllable to apprize us of his 

 excellent treatises on "Composition," &c. Thes ■, however, are but 

 a very few of tie omissions of the kind that might be instanced — 

 neither are such omissions confined to English writers of the class; 

 on the contrary, we have detected so many in regard to foreign ones 

 of different countries, that we are warranted in describing this de- 

 partment of the work — which, if executed with decent care, might 

 have been rendered an eminently serviceable one— as grossly de- 

 fective. Besides this, and besides being more or less defective in 

 regard to architectural biogr.iphy generally, the articles belonging to 

 it are for the greater part exceedingly meagre and unsatisfactory — 

 in fact, treated as if of little or no interest to any one. Now, al- 

 though in planning the work, it might have been a question whether 

 ^'.rchitectural biography should be admitted or excluded — once ad- 

 mitted, it ought to have been quite as carefully and diligently exe- 

 cut'-d as the rest; or rather a great deal more carefully than any 

 part of the work now appears to be. Even when we cannot com- 

 pl: in, as we so frequently have to do, of positive omission, we some- 

 times obtain a bare name, without even so njuch as determined dates. 

 Will it b^ believed that only two lines and a half are allotted to 

 Ventura Rodriguez, the Spanish architect par excellence of the last 

 century, the mere list of whose works forms a catalogue of several 

 pages in Llaguno, and of whom there is a very extensive memoir or 

 " Elojio," by no less a writer than Jovellanos? Had all the rest been 

 in the same proportion, the whole work would not have exceeded a 

 single volume ; whereas' at present no sort of proportion at all has 

 been observed, for there are some articles of most extravagant and 

 outrageous length. By way of contrast to the instance just quoted, 

 and the very scanty and imperfect information to be derived from the 

 architectural articles in general, we refer to those on Rembrandt and 

 Rubens, both of whom have been so amply spoken of in innumerable 

 biographical works of every description, that condensation rather 

 than extension in regard to them, would have been a merit. Never- 

 theless, to the former of these no fewer than one hundred and thirty 

 si> pages are assigned; and to the other ninely one, ov together 227 

 pages : thus more space is given to those two artists than to upwards 

 of One Thousand ! and so far from being exaggerated this number 

 might be even doubled, there being a prodigious quantity of names 

 which do not average in length above one-tenth of a page. 



After all, those two special articles consist chiefly of descriptive 

 catalogues or lists of the etchings of the one, and of the numerous 



engravings from the works of the other — useful no doubt to print- 

 collectors, but altogether misplaced in a work of this kind. Consis- 

 tency, indeed, there is in respect to lists of engravings, for they are 

 given most liberally in every case, nothing being easier than to extract 

 them rea.fy prepared from Bartsch and other works of that kind, and 

 so fill up page after page by mere " scissors-and-paste " industry. 

 But while print-collectors are likely to be already provided with the 

 inform;ition thus diligently collected for them, others, who are not 

 particularly interested in it, have good reason for complaining that it 

 occupies a very undue space, and that while this Kunstler-Lexicon 

 is rendered greatly more voluminous and expensive than there is any 

 occasion for, by the insertion of such lists of engravings, it fre- 

 quently does not afford them at all the information they seek. At all 

 events the work does not fairly answer to its title; greatly exceeding 

 in one particular the promise made by it, but falling very far short of 

 it in all the rest — in the architectural department more especially ; 

 where the only additions of any interest, to that species of biogr.iphy 

 and history, are the articles on some of the living architects of 

 Germany. 



By aiming at univemality, this " Lexicon of Artists" has been ren- 

 dered far less complete than it might have been, by contracting the 

 plan of it. The quantity of names is so enormous that in very many 

 places it looks like a mere catalogue ; and of the rest there is a 

 good deal that seems mere dry indiscriminate compilation — and 

 frequently very slovenly performed, into the bargain — to say no- 

 thing of egregious blunders. In regard to these last, we do not 

 know whether there are any more such flagrant ones as those above 

 pointed out, but they are sufficient to destroy all confidence in 

 the work as an authority: all that we do not know to be correct, 

 or cannot verify for ourselves, lies under the suspicion of being 

 wrong. The whole is a sort of chance-medley, done according 

 to no other principle than that of taking without inquiry — without 

 either selection or rejection, whatever was most come-at-able. Being 

 done, however, this Kunstler Lexicon will now for a long vt bile stand 

 in the way of another undertaking of the kind, at least in Germany; 

 and as fur expecting anything of the kind in this country, it is almost 

 entirely out of the ipiestion : else we should recommend for it a divi- 

 sion into separate publications of special biograpiiy. A dictionary 

 of architects only, or of both architects and sculptors, is a desider- 

 atum, and likely \^ remain so, because it would be most unpromising 

 as a bookselling speculation. If to be done at all — at least so as to 

 be done satisfactorily, such a Biographical Dictionary ought to be 

 brought out by some " Society." There is, indeed, one body from 

 whom an undertaking of the kind might be looked for — the Royal 

 Institute of Britsh Architects, were it not so un-ambitious and so 

 modest that it seeks no other fame than that which it now derives 

 from its Royalty. 



Original Geometrical Diaper Designs, by D. R. Hay, Decorative 

 Painter to the Queen, Edinburgh. London: Bogue. 



We have now a second part of Mr. Hav's designs before us, with a 

 continuation of his essay on ornamental design. With the practical 

 remarks in this on carpet ornament we concur, but page 5 abounds 

 with rank heresy, partly arising from looseness of expression, but cal- 

 culated to impress very incorrect doctrines on taste. It is to be in- 

 ferred from what Mr. Hay says, that ornament is something used to 

 conceal defects. "Wherever, therefore, we observe an ornament, we 

 may suspect a defect," His divarication of ornamental design is 

 rather trenchant. "There are two distinct classes of ornamental 

 design. The one belongs exclusively to architecture, and the other 

 conjointly to architecture and manufactures." What will be thought 

 of this by the archaeologists and polychromists — '• all merely architec- 

 tural ornaments are sculptured." We could accumulate notes of this 

 kind, and make a long comment on them, but we shall reserve our 

 remarks until the work is more advanced. 



Ancient and Modern Archiitcture. Edited by M.Jdles Gailhabaud. 

 Series the Second. Parts 18, 19, and 20. London: Didot. 



Part 18 is more interesting from the associations connected with 

 th*' buildings, than from their architectural merits. The cathedral of 

 Bile, in Switzerland, cannot be regarded as a fine composition, nor 

 the Palazzo Foscari at Venice. The latter is very meagre in its pro- 

 portions. Part 19 contains the Temple of Arveris at Edfu, and that 

 of Jupiter Olympus at Selinus. The plate of the latter contains a 

 good many details, but the subject is interesting enough to admit of 

 more copious illustration. Part 20 is by far the most pleasing of the 



18 



