i8^2.n 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCMITl'CTS JOURNAL. 



70 



could at most carry bome sketches, perhaps on'y mere descriptions of 

 them, and like those of Vitruvlus, erroneous ones; hence we have the 

 Doric order with ne-.v proportion-;, and stripped of all ornament, and 

 then called Tuscan, or left with some of them, and with the addition 

 of other parts, and still called Doric. Hence also the shafts of the 

 Ionic and Corinthian columns were attenuated, the capitals altered, 

 and by the combination of the bst-mentioned onlers, a new one called 

 Composite Wiis formed. Xone of these alterations appear to be im- 

 provements, as we may see by a comparison of the Roman with the 

 Grecian remains: the former indeed may strike the eye of an igno- 

 rant observer by its gaudy ornaments, but the latter recommends itself 

 by its noble simplicity and well adjusted proportions. 



All the buildings now existing in Italy, of a date prior to the subju- 

 gation of Greece, are destitute of columns (unless it be the temples at 

 PoEstum, the date of which is unknown, and which were the works of 

 a Grecian colony settled there), nor indeed have we any remains of 

 buildings of a date immediately subsequent to the conquest ; but of 

 those which do exist, the buildings of the earlier times, such as the 

 Sybil at Tivoli, the Jupiter Tonans, and the Pantheon at Rome, are 

 mere to be admired than those of a later date, such as the Uaths of 

 Dioclesian, and the Vesta at Rome, the palace at Spalatro, as also the 

 Tuins of Palmyra and Balbec, in Syria, in exact proportion as they 

 exhibit a departure from the Greek models, and to the length of time 

 the practice of the art had passed into other liands. 



It must be admitted, however, that the Romans, during this period, 

 invented the arch, and its application — the dome. The Egyptians, 

 from whom the Greeks learned architecture, covered their buildings 

 ■with a flat roof, of a single stone ; and as a roof for the clioragic 

 monument at Athens, commonly called the Lanthorn of Uemostheiies, 

 Tve find a single block of marble, nearly 12 feet in diameter, and 

 hollowed out so as to resemble a dome. 



The Greeks improved on this monolithic covering, and advanced 

 one step further towards the discovery of the arch, as we see in the 

 corballed roof of the tomb of Agamemnon, at Mycenee.* 



But with the exception of the arch and the dome, the practice of 

 architecture in Roman hands passed on from bad, in the age of Diocle- 

 sian, to worse in that of Constantine, when it appears to have lost all 

 its pristine purity. And in the dark ages, when all the arts and 

 sciences may be said to have been lost, architecture lay buried in its 

 own ruins. The only attempt made to revive it in Italy, during this 

 night of ignorance, was by placing the old columns of the Pagan tem- 

 ples in the churches, without reference to their proportions, as we see 

 in the Church of Aracoeli, on the Capitoline hill, and that of San 

 Sebastian, outside the walls of Rome. 



After this period there arose in Europe a new style, which is gene- 

 rally supposed to owe its origin to our intercourse with the East during 

 the Crusades; a reference, however, to the ruins of Dioclesian's palace 

 at Spalatro, will show the probable origin both of the Saracenic and 

 the Gothic, the offspring of the same parent, the Roman modification 

 of the Greek. And so far from the Gothic being derived from the 

 Saracenic, both are modifications of the same style, taught by the same 

 roasters to the inhabitants of dilTerent countries, and each of these 

 styles has as much resemblance to the Dioclesian, as this latter has to 

 the Greek. It is true we do not see at .Spalatro the clustered column 

 and the pointed arch, but we have slender columns placed on consols, 

 supporting circular arches, and distorted human faces are introduced 

 as ornaments, just as we see them in the florid Gothic. As it was, 

 until w itliin these very few years, contrary to the creed and practice 

 of the Mussulmans to make any reprcsiTtation of the human figure, 

 this practice could not have originated with the Saracens. 



Time will not permit our fcillowing up this part of the subject, how- 

 ever interesting it may be. We shall therefore leave the Gothic or 

 Pointed style for some other occasion, and pursue that which is called 

 Grecian. 



It has been already stated that Grecian architecture, as well as 



* I here beg to correct an error midc in the Travelling Sketches, vol. ii. 

 . 209, where the choragic monument it mentioned, instead of the tomb of 

 pgamcmnon. 



painting and sculpture, were neglected and unknown for centuries, 

 although the world possessed the elements of all three. The works 

 of the ancients were gems, the value of which was not appreciated by 

 the possessors ; for the rude figures carved by modern sculptois, 

 before the middle of the 1 Ith century, or the bard, wiry, stilf paintings 

 before the age of Da Vinci, cannot bo honoured with the names of 

 sculpture and painting. The revival of both we owe to Italy. That 

 country also lays claim to the resuscitation of Grecian architecture ; 

 and a number of her sons, at the head of whom stands Palladio, boast 

 of complete success, although it does not appear that one of them 

 ever saw a single specimen of Grecian architecture, ami that their 

 knowledge of it was only derived through the text of Vitruvius, and 

 the Roman debasem-nts, which presented to them beauties they did 

 not profit by — taking only the worst parts of this deteriorated style, 

 whicli however formed the only beauties of their own compositions. 



The estimation in which Vitruvius and Palladio are held in our 

 own country at this day, may be judged of when we hear, «jr cathtdrii, 

 "that the highest in rank in Italy are not ashamed to b-? profi-ssors of 

 an art whiidi Palladio adorned and Vitruvius taught." To the archi- 

 tects who hold such sentiments I would say — Gentlemen, until vou get 

 rid of all such opinions, pure architecture will not flourish, or your 

 profession be placed on that pinnacle of public estimation to which by 

 birthright it is entitled. 



About the middle of the 16th century, Palladio flourished. Many 

 other architects of equal merit (if indeed he had any), lived before 

 him ; but it would be useless to detain you with a mere catalogue of 

 names. Palladio stands confessed as the author of a style, and the 

 founder of a school, still much admired in this country. He has left us 

 drawings of most of the Roman buildings which were in existence in 

 his day, and of course more perfect than they are at present. So far 

 we are his debtors ; but strange to say, that although he must have 

 spent much time in measuring the ruins, and designing their restora- 

 tions, not one of his own designs, except the internal arraugements of 

 a little theatre at Vicenza, appears to harmonise with, or bear any 

 resemblance to the buildings of the ancients. 



The chief defects of this school are — 



Columns raised on stilts. 



Columns placed one above the other. 



Columns of dirterent orders ranged in the same elevation. 



The two frequent use of engaged columns. 



Columns swelling in the middle (oflensive to the eye, because an 

 indication of weakness). 



Thin columns having wide and irregular interspaces. 



Tapering pilasters. 



Finishing the tops of doors and wiudows like the c.ibles of houses, 

 or the roofs of camp bedsteads. 



Swelled friezes. And lastly. 



All simplicity destroyed by broken lines and partial projections. 



I orter no excuse for dwelling on this catalogue of vices, because 

 they have been copied, anil are copied every d.iy, in too many instances 

 in our own city. We shall therefore proceed to particularise and 

 notice these errors in detail — that when you see them in your daily 

 peregrinations, you may know them; and when public taste and judg- 

 ment arc better informed on the subject, we may hope they will not 

 continue to be perpetrated. 



In speaking without reserve of the modem buildings of this cily, I 

 am aware that a door is opened for criticism on the opinions advanced. 

 Well : let it come ! However the controversy may terminate, it must 

 lead to the eluri.lation of a favourite subject. I freely admit that 

 they who have designed those buildings have what is esteemed high 

 authority for what Ihey have done: and if they have not done belter, 

 it is because public taste (ill informed as it is) sought for no im- 

 provement. 



I feel that it would be unworthy both of you and myself, were 1 

 to stoop to conquer by flattery the displeasure of any, in setting before 

 you all a stimulus for exertion in the acquirement of architectural 

 knowledge. 



Most of the errors I have mentioned may be found in the Palace of 



