326 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



[Nov 



pare love and vivid perception of the Beautiful which essenlially charac- 

 terised the Greek race; and, above all, that the Fine Arts were not indi- 

 genous with them, but imported — imported, moreover, as the exotic pro- 

 ductions of a tributary province. The previous education of the Komans 

 by no means qualified them for a comprehension of the subtle principles 

 of Greek art ; and wlien we consider that they appropriated its splendid 

 results with no patriotic enthusiasm for them— with no higher feeling, 

 indeed, than the love of luxury and the ostentatious magnificence natural 

 to victorious invaders— it is scarcely to be wondered at that they misun- 

 derstood the spirit in which llieir glorious spoils had beeu designed. In 

 a word, the Romans not only laid no claim to the artistic feeling of the 

 Greeks, but actually boasted of the opposite tendency of their national 

 genius ; and the greatest of their poets so describes them in a noble pas- 

 sage, in which his evident object is to paint the character of his country- 

 men in its fairest colours : — 



" Others, I know, will more skilfully mould the breathing bronze and 

 shape the lifelike marble; others will excel in the arts of eloquence ; or, 

 by the aid of philosophy, mark out the pathways of heaven and tell the 

 risings of the stars. Uut, Roman ! take thou heed to rule nations by lliy 

 might! These shall be thy arts— to dictate terms of peace, to spare the 

 submissive, and subjugate the proud."* 



In pur.'iuing historically the development of arcuate construction, the 

 next period of its progress is that subsequent to the destruction of the 

 Roman Empire in the West at the close of the Ufih century. The change 

 which architecture now experienced was not one of mere individual form, 

 but one which effected a revolution in its fundamental principles, and led 

 ultimately to the most extraordinary results, by entirely destroying the old 

 classic forms and substituting altogether new kinds of arcliitectural com- 

 position and detail. The ch 'Hges which followed the fall of the Roman 

 empire, though essentially similar throughout Europe, assumed two difler- 

 ent forms of expression in the North and South. To the Northern class be- 

 long the Norman of our own country, the Romanesque of France and Ger- 

 many ; to the Southern, the Liimbardic style of Italy and Moresque of Spain. 

 These two classes, though originating in the same type, never amalgamated 

 at any subsequent period of the art. They possess, however, certain 

 grand features in common, which distinguish them from their Roman 

 model, and are especially to be noted as the real causes of the total change 

 of art which ultimately ensued. The grand innovations of the Ujzantine 

 period were, th^n, the ostensible use of butiresses and the employment of 

 columns to support arches springing directly from their capit.ils. Archi- 

 tecture continued, however, to exhibit the discordance between arcuatioa 

 and trabeation : the style every where manifests itself as transitional and 

 imperfect — and these evident marks of transition, it may be observed 

 parenthetically, are of themselves sufficient objection to the modern iiiiita- 

 lion of Xorman or Romanesque architecture. The buttresses of buildings 

 of that period never possessed «ny great solidity; the hiteral thrusts of 

 the arch were chiefly resisted by the enormous thickness of the walls, 

 Still a new and fruiiful principle had been introduced — that of applying 

 members for the exclusive purpose of resisting horizontal strains. The 

 springing of the arch, also, directly from the pillars, led to greatly in- 

 creased freedom of construction ; — the architect was thereby enabled to 

 get rid of the stmight entablature, which had been a source of constant 

 diliicully and restraint by giving to buildings a horizontal regularity, 

 whi'h, combined with the verticality of successive stories, confined the 

 architect to what may be loosely termed a reticulated mode of construction. 

 It is obvious, therefore, thut until tie arch was allowed to spring imme- 

 diately from the columns, it would be impossible to build edifices possess- 

 ing the diversity of form exhibited in the Cathedrals of Spires, IMayence, 

 or Peterborough, or the church of St. Martin, at Cologne. 



It will be seen, therefore, that the change introduced into the architec- 

 tnre of this period was a great step in the progress of arcuate construc- 

 tion towards its complete development; and although the contest between 

 the arch and entablature was not yet won, the casus hdli — the real discord- 

 ance between the two principles — had received practically an accurate 

 definition. The entablature still appeared, but was no longer sustained 

 upon columns. Where it existed, it was either supported by arches or 

 else was purely adscititious — that is, was simply affixed to the building for 



* Excudent alii spirantia mollius sera. 



Credo equ'dem : vivos ducent de inarmore vultus ; 

 Orabunt caiisas melius ; cceiiq'ie meatus 

 Describent radio, et surpenlia sidera dicent: 

 'J''i revere imijerio populits, Koiiiane, memento. 

 Hte tibi eruiit artes ; pacisque iniponere morem, 

 Parcere subjei-tis el debeUare supeibos. — i£u. vl. 347. 



ornament, without any constructive purpose. Nor was it the only member 

 of the architecture of this period which was treated thus inartistic illy : 

 arches of decoration, corbel-tables, &c., were frequently introduced, not 

 constructively, but merely as clumsy contrivances for giving variety to the 

 surface of the masonry. It is an important practical observation respect- 

 ing all mixed styles such as the Kuraao, Romanesque, and modern Mon- 

 grel Classic, that they necessitate the eniployment of adscitious orna- 

 ments to conceal the mechanical structure of the architecture. 



Romanesque architecture — taking tlie term Romanesque in its most 

 extended sense — may be considered to have lasted seven hundred years — 

 that is, to the end of the 12th century. At that time, another great change 

 took place iu European architecture — the iniruductioo of the ngival yrimitif 

 of France and the Early English or Lancet style here. The great formal 

 distinction between this style and the preceding is undoubtedly the intro- 

 duction of the Pointed arch. But our present object is to trace not so 

 much the changes of form, as those of construction which characterise 

 successive styles. Restricting ourselves to this branch of the subject, we 

 find the chief importance of the Pointed arch to consist in the lightness 

 and lufiiness of the structures iu which it is employed. By known me- 

 chanical principles it may be shown that, ccrleris paribus, the lateral thrust 

 of an arch is diminished as the rise, or height of the crown above the 

 springing, is increased. If, for instance, two arches, which sustain equal 

 loads, are of equal span, and resemble each other in all other respects 

 except their rise, be compared, the flattest arch will exert the greatest 

 horizontal thrust. Now, in the semicircular arch the rise could not 

 exceed half the span — in the Pointed arch, the rise was incr ased fre- 

 quently three-fold, and occasionally four-fold. It will be seen, therefore, 

 that in the new style the necessity of resisting lateral pressure would be 

 greatly diminished, and accordingly the piers and abutments aie found to 

 be much less massiie. The facility of sustaining great weights without 

 cumbrous piles of masonry at their bases, lead to the adoption of that 

 glorious characteristic of Christian architecture — the Spire; a member 

 which the perversity of modern debased architecture has applied to build- 

 ings in %vliich it necessitates incongruity or concealment of the mechanical 

 construction. 



Another important innovation of the Lancet style was the increased 

 breadth of the buttresses. This change may at first seem inconsistent with 

 the diminution of the lateral pressures of the arches; but it is to be re- 

 membered that in the preceding style, these pressures were resisted not by 

 buttresses so much as by continuous walls of enormous thickness; and 

 that in this style the thickness of the walls was greatly diminished. So 

 that in the Lancet style, in fact, the appliances for resisting lateral pres- 

 sures were not increased, but merely rendered more apparent. In the 

 Norman style the whole wall formed one continuous buttress; in the new 

 style this continuity was broken — the buttresses were put just where they 

 were wanted, and no where else. Moreover, the form of this buttress was 

 greatly improved : instead of being of a uniform height fiom the base to 

 the summit (like the continuous wall) it became tabulattd — that is, di- 

 minished by stages. To refer again to mechanical principles, we see how 

 great an advantage was here gained. The mechaniial requisites of a but- 

 tress are that the "line of pressure" should fall wilhiu the buttress in 

 every part of it; so that provided the base be sufficiently broad and the 

 diminution of the breadth of the buttress from below upwards be not too 

 rapid, all the strength of a uniform structure is attained. The new form 

 of the buttress, therefore, effects a vast saving of superfluous material, 

 and, therefore, a great increase of architectural beauty. 



No generic changes of arcuate construction were made subsequently to 

 those described. The succeeding style (the Decorated of this country) 

 introduced great variety and complexity of form, and the traces of the 

 entablature are still fainter than in Early English. Still, considered con- 

 structively, the arch and its appliances remained unaltered. In the third 

 stjie, however, the arch becomes far less acute than before. It is curious 

 to notice in this, as iu many other cases, the recurring cycle of variations, 

 which seems to be a law of art. The first innovation of Pointed architec- 

 ture was the lofty acute arch — now the arch becomes actually fl,itter than 

 in the old Norman or Roman. As a necessary consequence, the piers and 

 buttresses are increased in magnitude. Me have now the piers of the 

 nave of M'inchester, the buttresses of King's College Chapel, and the 

 flying buttresses of Westminster Hall. 



The later Perpendicular exhibits in form, but not in reality, a return to 

 the Trabeate system. Horizontal lines become more frequent than here- 

 tofore : but they are usually confined to surface-pauellmg, transom-bars, 

 and similar details. They never exhibit themselves in true anhiiraves, 

 or single unjoiuted blocks. On the contrary, the extraordinary width now 



