366 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



[December, 



stantly at such a pressure that the gauge indicates 25 inches — then it is 

 clear tliat the train will be accelerated till the opposing resistance, which 

 increases with the velocity is such as to be equal to the remaining part of 

 the effective forward pressure, and therefore while the train is being thus 

 accelerated, the gauge will have been stationary. 



If you think this worth insertion in your valuable Journal, I shall be 

 very glad. It is a plain instance of a case where the mere turning the rea- 

 soning into the form of an algebraic equation and applying the most simple 

 principles of dynamics, we are enabled to see clearly the reasons of dis- 

 agreement between two such distinguished men as Dr. Robinson and Mr, 

 Stephenson. 



I remain, your obedient servant, 



M. CowiE. 



College for Civil Engineers, Putney, Oct. 29. 



THE DECADENCE OF CLASSIC ARCHITECTURE. 



Humano capiti cervicem pictor equinam 

 Jungere si velit, et varias inducers plumas, 

 Undique collatis membris, nt turpiter atrum 

 Desinat in piscem mulier formosa superne, 

 Specutum admissi lisum teneatis amici ? 



No one who has observed the modern history of architecture in this 

 country can have failed to notice the growing preference in popular 

 estimation of the mediaeval to the classic styles, whereas in the last age 

 all great public buildings were erected, or were professed to be erected, 

 after the Grecian or Roman models. At the present lime, those forms of 

 construction are perpetually supplanted by pointed architecture, and 

 seem in a fair way to fall into desuetude. It will form by no means an 

 unprofitable inquiry to examine how this change in the public taste has 

 been brought about, and to consider whether the effects which it promises 

 will be advantageous or disadvantageous to the true interest of archi- 

 tecture. 



The Georgian era had one leading characteristic, which marked alike 

 the literature, fine arts, politics, manners, and even religion of that age. 

 That distinguishing feature was a hideous, unmeaning formality. The 

 same feeling that produced the rythmic precision of Pope, the polished 

 lieartlessness of Chesterfield the sesqitipedalia verba of Johnson exhibits 

 itself with equal distinctness in the artificial, ungraceful extravagancies of 

 court costume, the polished inanity of court sermons, the cold, unfeeling 

 despotism of court politics, and the studied and laboured barbarism of 

 court architecture. 



In an age like the present, not only unmarked by this state-formalility, 

 but avowedly and distinctly opposed to it, it is not to be wondered at 

 that architectural taste has been affected by the great and general change 

 in the " spirit of the times." What a clear, unambiguous reflex of this 

 spirit of the times is uniformly exhibited by its architecture ! The severe 

 effective lines of Norman architecture — the simple majesty of the lancet 

 style adding to the boldness of the preceding style the graces of more 

 laboured ornament — the polished and perfected beauty of the Decorated 

 Period — and the over refinement of the Perpendicular, iu which art, losing 

 the freshness of youth, lapsed into formalism — what are these mutations 

 but exact transcripts of the genius of the successive generations that 

 produced them? They are, so to speak, of so many chapters of monu- 

 mental history, written in stone, the mason and cunning artificer being the 

 faithful chroniclers. 



In like manner do we trace the successive changes of the feelings of the 

 Greeks in the successive changes of their modes of construction. The 

 pages of Aristophanes do not give a clearer insight into the Grecian mind 

 than do the Temple of Theseus and the Parthenon. The imperfect imi- 

 tation of the Greek styles by the Romans again is exactly characteristic 



of a less refined and intellectual people. The monolithic structures 



the cromlechs and cairns of the Druids, the eternal pyramids of Egypt, 

 the fantastic minarets of St. Sophia, the idol-caverns of Elephanta, the 

 aboriginal temples of Yucatan, all tend to confirm the same principle, that 

 the pervading genius of nations finds an exact and trustworthy exemplar 

 in the spirit of their architecture. 



It is unnecessary to multiply proofs of this ; they will naturally suggest 

 themselves to every careful observer ; and besides, it is very easy to find 

 reasons for the national feeling being thus typified by the national architec- 

 ture. There will therefore be no difficulty iu conceding that the principle is 



universally true ; and if so, it will operate in our time as much as at any 

 other. This being granted, the truth is no longer merely speculative and 

 theoretical, but assumes the greatest practical importance — it becomes a 

 matter of the highest and most direct interest to the architect to ascertain 

 what change is likely to be produced in architecture by the change of 

 popular feeling. For if we have succeeded in convincing the reader that 

 the premises here assumed are something more than mere fine-spun 

 theories, and actually contain practical and homely truth, it will be seen 

 that the permanent fame of the architect really and truly depends on 

 applying the theory to existing circumstances; for if his taste run one 

 way, while the public spirit is inevitably moving in the opposite direction, 

 he may be quite sure that his fame, if he get any^ is transitory, and will 

 certainly soon be forgotten. 



Take, for instance, the works of Sir John Soane. The adulation of 

 academies, the compliments of kings, the popular plaudits, have now 

 ceased. The people cannot now discover that excelling beauty in a style 

 that entranced the preceding generation. Admiration has lapsed into 

 indifference, and then sunk in contempt, and the works of Soane, at the 

 very moment we write, are exemplifying the principle we have assumed, 

 and are being destroyed, to make way for (it is hoped) a better, because a 

 purer, architecture. 



The change of feeling which has produced this disregard for the works 

 of Soane bad only begun to operate in his day ; it has acquired more 

 strength in ours, and will, it may be predicted, gain still more hereafter. 

 The progress of education among the people has given them a purer and 

 more definite taste, a greater love of philosophical accuracy than they have 

 heretofore possessed. As far as men can judge of their own times, we 

 may say that the present age is by far the most generally reflective and in- 

 tellectual that has hitherto been known in the world. There is now a widely 

 spread knowledge of accurate self nee, or at least a love of it, and withal 

 there is a strong feeling of poetry, a love of the beautiful. The present 

 age is not a merely utilitarian one — there is, on the contrary, a general 

 reverence for the fine arts — only the advancement of science has taught 

 people to apply severer tests to all the arts, including architecture, than 

 they have hitherto done, and to demand that they be philosophically 

 accurate. 



Now, both Grecian and Christian architecture possess (when exhibited 

 in their purity) this philosophical accuracy. Neither, therefore, is it Id 

 itself disqualified from gratifying the taste of the present age on this score. 

 The other great popular feeling which we have mentioned (love of beauty) 

 is also satisfied by both styles alike, so that we may safely conclude that 

 neither iutrinsically contains anything repugnant to the spirit of the age. 

 But if we can show that one of them, at least, has never been philoso- 

 phically treated in this country, that the attempts made to impress ou the 

 Grecian the characteristics of the mediaeval modes are essentially im- 

 pbilosophical, we shall have at once assigned a perfectly satisfactory 

 reason for the decadence of classic architecture. 



The distinction between the two styles of architecture recognized in 

 modern Europe is marked with suthcient clearness. The one soars to a 

 great height, and abounds in lofty vertical lines; the other attains but au 

 inferior altitude, and abounds in prolonged horizontal lines. The one 

 loves the complexity and combination of dissimilar parts, the other, sim- 

 plicity, symmetry, and unity of outline. The one exhibits itself by deep 

 shadows, the other by strong lights.* The one is essentially picturesque 

 (in the artistic sense of the word), the other is statuesque. The one is 

 the offspring of a wild and fertile fancy, the other is the production of 

 disciplined and scholarlike art. The one is imaginative, the other intel- 

 lectual ; the uncontrolled sweetness of Shakspere's vei'sification, and the 

 studied perfection of Milton's metre, do not differ more than do the modes 

 of expression in Christian and classic architecture. 



In all these characteristics (and the professional reader will suggest many 

 more) the spirits of the two styles are widely different ; but they are some- 

 thing mure than different — they are antithetical — directly opposed to each 

 other. The Pointed architecture is the exact antithesis of the Grecian. 

 We must therefore, if we have succeeded in convincing the reader thus 



* It is not liere meant to be denied that the Greelcs produced elfects by alternations of 

 light and shadow, but their alternations were not nearly so great or so frequent as those 

 ot the Christian architects. They have no|projecting transepts with dark angles, uo huge 

 buttresses —their mouldings and the capitals of their columns are convex, and never have 

 the deeply-cut recesses of our own styles. Their alternations of light and shadow are not 

 abrupt, they avoid rapid transitions, sudden contrasts, bold projections, and salient an- 

 gles; the shadows melt away into light by softened and delicate shading.— Respecting 

 the characteristic distinctions of mouldings, it might have been added in the text, that 

 vnrtical mouldings are almost (perhaps entirely) unknown in true Grecian architectore, 

 whereas in Gothic they greatly predominate, and the horizontal, where they occur, take 

 their character and form from the vertical. 



