1846.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



361 



THE INTERIOR OF THE FITZWILLIAM JIUSEUM. 

 fJJ'ith an Engraving, Plate XV J 11. J 

 The accompanying- engravings exliibit the internal arrangement of the 

 Museum at Camhiidge, of which the farade is represented in the Journal for 

 May last, page 129. The building is occupied internally ^y a ground floor, 

 and an upper or principal floor. The latter is approached by a staircase of 

 most magnificent dimensions, leading from the hall to the sculpture gallery 

 which extends round three sides of the hall and staircase. The architectural 

 and sculptural ornaments of this gallery are to be of the richest and most 

 elaborate description, and this part of the building alone will, it is estimated 

 cost when completed £10,000. Here will be deposited the valuable collec- 

 tion of statues bequeathed by Earl Fitzwilliam and others. Several of these 

 works are roaster-pieces of the highest class. 



The principal floor contains a picture gallery 67 feet long by 39 feet 

 broad; the height of the frieze being 27 ft., and the height of the frieze 

 IS 3 ft. 6 in., which is a correct copy of the Elgin Marbles at the British 

 Museum, and from it springs a richly ornamented coved ceiling, which curves 

 inwards from the sides to the centre of the apartment ; above the four upper 

 boundaries of this cove rise a vertical lanthern light, between each light are 

 beautifully draped and winged figures, and above is a horizontal ceiling 

 divided into compartments and most elaborately enriched with open panels 

 and above which are conic-al sky-lights ; the whole height of the room from' 

 the floor to the conical sky-light is 53 feet. The floor will be of wainscot 

 with an inlaid border, and all round the apartment there is a scagliola dadj 

 of Rosst hroccata, with a plinth of black and gold marble. The side picture 

 galleries communicate with that which we have been describing, by arched 

 openings, of which the archivolts and pilasters are decorated with various 

 kinds of scagliola. 



The ground floor of the building will be occupied by another sculpture 

 gallery under the long and two end galleries, a library beneath one of the 

 tide galleries, and a museum of terra cottas and vases beneath the other side 

 gallery There is a large space under the hall and the portico, occupied 

 by vaults, which we think might be usefully occupied as a sepulchral mu- 

 seum. 



There appears to be some intention to remove the frieze containing a 

 copy of the Elgin Marbles,-we most sincerely trust that this wasteful 

 alteration will be resisted by the Senate. The frieze is thought to detract 

 from the height of the room ; we think however that when the walls are 

 filled with paintings, the appearance in the height will be increased, and be- 

 «.des. It IS perfectly useless to have paintings where the frieze now is, which 

 IS 27 feet from the floor-for who will be able to see them to appreciate their 

 m^rit at so great a distance from the eye .' 



Mr Cockerell has obtained permission to substitute real for imitative 

 marbles in the work yet to be undertaken, and he deserves great praise for 

 having effected this alteration. The enrichments and carving are admirably 

 executed, from the designs of the late Mr. Basevi, by Mr. Nichols, of Graf- 

 tnn-stieet, London, whose name deserves to be recorded with great com 

 mendation; and we understand that it was Mr. Basevi's intention that all 

 the enrichments should be picked out in gold and polvcbrome 



We are very desirous of seeing the brick fence wall now enclosing the 

 ground at the back of the Museum removed, and replaced by a ballustrade 

 similar to that at the front. This would open the back view to Pelerhouse 

 ground and form a great improvement to the Sculpture gallery, as well as 

 to the College grounds. 



When the Museum is finished, we hope there will be a greater liberality 

 shown to the public in allowing them to view the magnificent works of art 



at will adorn it, than at Oxford, where the Taylor Institute has all 

 h gates and doors closed, and admittance is only obtained either by an 

 reduction by a member of the University, or by pennission of the porter 

 Of course, as at many other public establishments, a fee is expected 



aslfed! m!"h '"'1l ",™""' ""■°"^'' ""^ ^°"^"^ grounds of Oxford, we 

 asked a member of the University if permission could be obtained for view- 



L'Llrv 'Tl ^^r'fr"^ ^^»"'^<^™'- ">« l-aj'or Institute. Radcliffe 



library &c. He said he had no doubt it might by speaking to the attend- 



ts ; course they would look for a fee to be paid them for their trouble 



he jealousy with which Academical and Ecclesiastical corporations, ad 



the edifices committed to their trust is on every account to be re^tted 



TRABEATE AND AUCUATE ARCHITECTURE. 



SECOND ARTICLE. 



No. Ill,— Vol. IX.— December, 184C. 



In order that any branch of human knowledge may become a science it 

 must be founded ou exact principles which distinguish it from every other 

 science. The mere compilation of facts and opinions, however valuable 

 and accurate in themselves, will not lead to systematic and definite results 

 unless the facts be referred to, aud the principles deduced from fundamental 

 axioiQS. 



The application of these considerations to architecture is very simple 

 Facts and dogmas innumerable relating to architecture have been recorded' 

 but we have been too apt to estimate them according to their intrinsic not 

 their relative, value. Now the most valuable aid to the advancement of 

 architecture will be the systemizing our present knowledge of it : it has 

 hitherto been seldom regarded as a system. If every critic is to pronounce 

 on the merits of each new edifice as it looks to his eye, it is obvious that 

 his criticism will have no higher than an individual authority, that it may 

 be disregarded by contemporaries and reversed by posterity. But if some 

 great architectural principle be universally received hy both critics and 

 the criticized as the basis of all criticism, aud if this principle be so com- 

 prehensive as to include every style of architecture, it is clear that much 

 less will be left, than before, to the fallibility of individual judgment and 

 that the conclusions obtained will possess the value of being systematic 



We search in vain for any other principle than that of constructive faith- 

 fulness, which receives universal consent. There are, it is true, many 

 architects and architectural writers, who find it their interest to resist thea;,. 

 plication of this principle, but none are now bold enough to deny its abstract 

 truth. It is curious to observe bow completely the general opinion has 

 changed on this point. Now it is conceded on all hands that (theoretically 

 at least) the decoration of an edifice ought to be the exponent of its con- 

 slruction-yet it is not a very long period since a doctrine the direct reverse 

 of this was maintained. The Abbfe Laugier in his Obsen-ations sur I'archi- 

 teclure (Haye 1765) condemns Pointed architecture, because edifices built 

 in that style exhibit too evidently their mechanical structure. Some of his 

 remarks are so directly opposed to the doctrines of the best writers of the 

 present day, that the following version of a few sentences may be interest- 

 ing, if not valuable. All the requirements of solidity (says he) consist in 

 establishing a proper equilibrium between the arch which thrusts and the 

 abutment which receives the thrust. Buildings, however, ought to be so 

 constructed that no part of them may appear to exert or resist pressure. 

 Up to the present time we have been too much subject to this grand defect 

 of Gothic churches ; not until it was high time, did a man of genius teach us 

 to do better. The arches of the new church of St. Genevieve are sufliciently 

 supported, but no one can see how they are so. Nothing external an- 

 nounces resistance aud eflort. The spectator has no observations to make 

 on the strength or weakness of the buttresses. Delivered from all anxiety 

 on this point, he gives himself up to undisturbed coutemplation of the 

 beauty of the edifice. 



Since the \hh^ Laugier wrote this curious passage, architectural know- 

 ledge has so greatly increased, that it would be superfluous to show here 

 the fallacy of his opinions. They are quoted to prove how ingeniously an 

 error may be disguised, and to show that, in his time at least, it was ad- 

 mitted that the architecture subsequent to the Pointed was inconstructive 

 This IS a most important admission, and one which many a modern practi- 

 tioner would like to retract. 



The importance of distinguishing between entablature and arch archi- 

 tecture was, we think, first insisted upon by Hope, in the invaluable Archi- 

 tectural Essay, which it may be presumed has by this time been carefully 

 read by every one who professes a knowledge of architectural principles 

 Ihe unsparing denunciations which Hope commenced against the showy 

 unreal decoration employed during the last three centuries, in consequence 

 of a confusion of the principles of trabeation and arcuation, have been ad- 

 mirably followed up by Professors Willis and Whewell, in the works from 

 which we quoted in the preceding article on the present subject. Until 

 however, the laws which Hope suggested, and which Whewell and Willis' 

 o.veloped, be practically applied, they remain almost barren speculations. 

 iUe object set before us is not so much to elucidate existing architecture 

 as to promote its future advancement. To this end it is requisite to see 

 how far the laws in question tend to facilitate or impede the improvement of 

 modern decorative construction. 



It may be objected that in making architectural decoration immediately 

 dependent on mechanical structure, we restrict the art to purely uUlitarian 



47 



