1 843.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



3 



late the due balance of the arabesques, if they were identified with 

 them ; but the composition is rescued from that fault, by the separate 

 character given to the decoration of the medallions, and by their 

 being detached, and hung as it were, independently upon the back- 

 ground. In the general arrangement of the whole, these medallions 

 perform a very important part, connecting the pilasters with the 

 panelled stuccos adjoining, both by their relief, and by means of an ac- 

 cordant style of decoration and a similarity in the subjects repre- 

 sented upon them, neither of which could have been well embodied 

 in the arabesque itself, (see Plate I, Fig. 1.) 



It must be admitted, that these compositions considered separately, 

 are somewhat unequal, and the examples to be first passed in review 

 are by no means the best ; but instruction may be derived from a con- 

 sideration of their defects. There are in this pilaster, (No. 1,) many 

 graceful details, but the effect is less pleasing and satisfactory than in 

 some others where there is a greater unity of composition, and where 

 the objects are less varied and numerous ; moreover, too many of the 

 forms in this example are somewhat stiff". The guillochi which oc- 

 cupies the lower part of the half pilaster, is extremely rich ; and we 

 shall find throughout the series, that this part of the composition 

 bears a solid and architectural character, in conformity with the 

 principle which has already been adverted to. Upon the stuccos it 

 is not my intention to dilate ; I would merely draw your attention to 

 the beautiful simplicity of the panelling. The antique figures which 

 till the comparlments would require a separate dissertation to describe 

 them only. They harmonize, as before observed, with the subjects 

 contained in the medallions. The clusters of natural fruit and foliage 



which surround the windows are continued throughout the series of 

 arches, and are greatly varied in detail, though precisely similar in 

 composition. There is nothing conventional in these festoons— the 

 clusters are simply connected together by a string, and are composed 

 of the most familiar objects rendered with perfect truth. (Fig. 3.) The 

 melon, the orange, the chesnut, the tomata, the olive, grapes of different 

 kinds, pomegranates, gourds of every description, pine and cypress 

 cones, are those which most frequently recur, with their foliage 

 and blossoms. The artist has not even disdained the cabbage, the 

 cucumber, and the onion. 



No. 2, has the same faults as the first. The frame, with the horse, 

 saddled and bridled, is quite in the spirit of the antique decorations, 

 but it divides the pilaster disagreeably, and is not a proper subject to 

 occupy the principal place in the composition. In the side pilaster 

 we have a rather thin and wiry scroll, of which both the foliage and 

 flowers are conventional, but the convolvulus major twines beautifully 

 and naturally over the fret below. 



In No. 3, a closely woven festoon of foliage and flowers is formed 

 into panels — not, I think, very happily, since the arrangement is such 

 as the eye does not very readily comprehend, and even if it were 

 more simple, it would scarcely be applicable, since it divides into 

 many distinct parts the panel which is in itself a single feature of 

 the general design ; its integrity is therefore destroyed by this mode 

 of decoration. The subjects which occupy the panels are, however, 

 well worthy of attention. The group of deer, the landscape, the 

 dog chasing a porcupine, the. Cupid on the dolphin, and the two 

 winged children manoeuvring a dancing bear, are all in the true spirk 

 of the antique. The single figures are less so ; an ancient painter 

 would not have placed them on a scrap of earth. In the Pompeian 

 decorations, the detached figures — I do not speak of such as are in- 

 closed in frames, but the detached figures — partake of the artificial 

 character of the style to which they are adopted, and if they are not 

 represented as floating in the air, they stand upon a bracket, or a 

 mere line, or on anything but the natural ground. In the panels of 

 the stucco are male and female chimeras, enveloped in a scroll formed 

 of the natural branches of the briar rose. 



In No. 4, we arrive at a greater unity in the design, for though it 

 consists of many parts, yet they all bear upon each other, and are 

 mutually connected throughout. The temple which forms the centre 

 of the composition is altogether in the style of architecture which 

 holds so important a place in the arabesques of the baths of Titus 

 and Pompeii. I call it a style of architecture, for in the ancient 

 paintings, where it generally forms the framework of the composi- 

 tion, and contributes greatly to that unity of design which distin- 

 guishes the ancient arabesque, it assumes a regularity and consis- 

 tency which fairly entitle it to the appellation of a style. The sup- 

 porting figures are objectionable, for they are in motion — common 

 walking motion. Much more objectionable are the terminal figures 

 which rise from the acroteria of the temple. 



My objection to these terminal figures is, that they are improbable. 

 Improbable, I mean, upon certain postulates, which it is necessary to 

 assume before we can reason upon these imaginary compositions at 

 all. The mythology of the ancients has peopled the elements with 

 beings compounded of the human and brute creation, their intelli- 

 gence being indicated by the first, and their fitness for the region they 

 are supposed to inhabit by the second. There is nothing in ancient 

 art, in which greater taste or judgment is displayed, than in some of 

 these combinations. The animal functions appear in no wise com- 

 promised by the mere interchange of corporeal members, between 

 different species. Such combinations, therefore, as long as they in- 

 volve no glaring disproportions, present nothing repugnant to the 

 mind; and we aie so familiarized to them, that we pronounce upon 

 the success of the representation of a triton, a satyr, or a centaur, 

 with as little hesitation as we might upon that of any of the animals 

 of which they are compounded. We are equally ready, or perhaps 

 owing to a stronger association of ideas, more ready, to admit of 

 aerial beings, supporting themselves on wings, floating in the ether, 

 or alighting upon a flower without bending the stalk, though these 



