1842.] 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



83 



love, and I might almost &ay with a veneration for it. To produce au entire 

 change in architecture, which appears to be the wish and aim of your corree- 

 pondent, it nould be necessary that the inventor, if I may be allowed the 

 term, should be brouglit up in utter ignorance of our present style, and 

 almost destitute of any knowledge of oiu- domestic economy ; and then it 

 cannot be expected that he should bring the same to perfection, as it is the 

 DOtoral course of Providence that all things shall progress, " necessity" being 

 made the •• first law of nature." 



Precedent, I think, must appear to every person to be necessary to the 

 right discharge of almost every duty of onr lives. It must actuate all ; and 

 indeed so mi.xed up is it in every grade of society, that it does actuate all our 

 movements. It has done so bom Adam's fall, and must continue to do so to 

 the end of time. 



Your correspondent next repudiates the idea of adhering to one period of 

 architecture in fonning a design, and inquires, why should not an ornament 

 of a late period be introduced in a design of a much earlier, provided the 

 same looks well ? And forsooth, why not ? why not unite the chirolt mould 

 of the Norman to the compressed arch of the Tudor, and the mongrel column 

 of the late degenerate Ehzabethan school - Perhaps your correspondent 

 would affirm that this would not look well ; and truly it would not to a cor- 

 rect eye, but to a pupil brought up according to your correspondent's wishes, 

 such a cmtglomrration would not appear incongruous, neither would he 

 understand why it should not be so. Should such a state of architecture 

 ever arrive, when an architect could with impunity amalgamate different 

 periods, and I might add ditferent styles, for the evil when once let in would 

 not stop, — should such a time ever arrive, architecture will then be on the 

 ■wane, England's glory will be setting; for, to go back to precedent, there 

 has never been a country whose architecture has degenerated, but whose 

 whole energies have been crippled, and whose glory has set. Mliile at the 

 same time I woiUd give to precedent its place, I would not be unmindful of 

 the great use of it. 1 conceive it to be the curb of the architect's imagina- 

 tion ; not that he is servilely to follow all its dictates, but to guide his 

 judement, and having studied fully all its bearings in ancient architecture, he 

 will be better able to come to a correct notion of what true architecture ought 

 to combine, and will act rightly, having had his mind thus well schooled. 

 This I conceive to be the great use of precedent, not only in architecture, but 

 in every other study. 



Having thus inquired into the great use of precedent, allow me now to 

 inquire into the right use of it. To make a right use of precedent, it requires 

 a thorough knowledge of ancient architecture, and not of architecture only, 

 but also the domestic habits and economy of former ages. To do this, it is 

 impossible that any man can gain it by the "road side," — it unfortunately is 

 not written so clear, that he that runneth may read. What then is required ? 

 much more than, I am sorry to say, the Royal Institute of Architects 

 imagines, or I cannot believe that men in the highest ranks and ability 

 in the profession would ever remain so supine to the best interests of their 

 profession. Why is it that that body does not bestir itself, for now is the 

 time, while they have such interest, their President being the representative 

 of royalty in the sister land - Why not obtain for architecture what the 

 Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons have done for medicine ? Then, 

 and not till then, will architecture and architects take their proper stand 

 throughout the country. What can militate against architecture so much 

 as the fact which is a very common occurrence in the country, of a common 

 joiner, with a httle more nous than his brethren, practising as an architect, 

 to the great detriment of the legitimate architect .' And that man gets sup- 

 ported ; why .- because he undertakes work at a much lower charge than the 

 other ; and merchants, who only look at the pounds, shillings, and pence, are 

 well utisfied, although there is the greatest incongruity, such as I have seen. 

 Amongst numbcrleis others, to mention a small thing, of putting the Tudor 

 rose in the facia of a Grecian shop facade, and otherwise mutilating the 

 style. Of course this, to your correspondent, would not be any detriment or 

 eye-sore, as il loolti vtU to a man who knows no better. 



I am. Sir, 



Sheffield, Your obedient servant, 



Jan. 26, 1842. j. M. 



ARCIIITECTl'RAL ITIECEDENT. 



I WAS agreeably lurpriwd upon finding two correspondents cipreuing 

 ideas 90 nearly coincident with my own on thii nibject, when I bad rather 



expected that, if any notice was taken of the matter, it would emanate from 

 the adverse party, and convey anything rather than approval. It would be 

 well for architecture, if a larger proportion of its professors held the same 

 liberal views as those espoused by " Ditto" and " J. L." 



The remarks of the former so entirely agree with my own notions on the 

 subject, that they do not call for any reply : J. L., however, in consequence 

 of the want of exphination, has not taken that view of the influence of classical 

 education wliich I had intended to convey. Its general effect upon the pub- 

 lic mind— the bias which it produces in the feelings of society — the erroneous 

 impressions it gives rise to — were the results to which it was wished to draw 

 attention. 



It will. 1 think, be at once conceded, that if one subject be allowed to en- 

 gross any mind, to the exclusion of all others, that subject will be almost 

 certainly magnified in importance far beyond its proper standard, even though 

 that mind may be "well informed in other departments. How much more, 

 then, will this be the case, when the attention has been confined to one study 

 during the whole course of education, when all other kinds of iofurmatioa 

 have been withheld, and when there has been no opportunity of drawing any 

 comparison between the meriu of different branches of knowledge, or differ- 

 ent races of men ? Is it not probable, therefore, that when a young man has 

 spent all the early years of his life in close attention to one study— the his- 

 tory of the ancients, their wars and enterprises, their heroes and their 



victories, their cities and temples, their orators and statesmen when ho 



looks on their philosophy as the highest attainment of human wisdom— 

 when he reads of their deeds in the high-flown poetry of Homer and Virpl— 

 when, in the warmth of a youthful imagination, he paints their actions, if 

 possible, in brighter colours than even the poets themselves have done, and 

 takes his imaginations for realities — when he becomes infected with the 

 admiration for martial glory, and thinks nothing so noble as war — when he 

 attaches to virtue the meaning given to it by the Romans, and looks upon 

 animal courage as one of the highest attributes of human nature ; — when, I 

 say, he docs all this, and at the same time knows little or nothing of the 

 grandeur of modem science — when he has not the faintest conception of the 

 gigantic mass of knowledge collected by the philosophers of the present day 

 — valuable knowledge, cnnobUng knowledge, knowledge which enlarges the 

 mind, and advances mankind physically and mentally — when he knows 

 nothing of what is done, as well as what is ihioirn — nothing of the wonderful 

 achievements of modem ingenuity, nothing of the almost miraculous results 

 of the applications of science to the arts and manufactures : — under all these 

 circumstances I ask, is it not probable — nay, is it not certain — that he will 

 get up from his studies with a prepossession in favour of the antienta ? — a 

 prepossc!sion which will tinge all the opinions of his after life— which will 

 lead him to admire all that is old, in virtue of its antiquity — wliich will lead 

 him to make wrong estimates of the beautiful and the noble — a bias, in 

 short, which will be an injury to himself and to society. 



This is a very interesting subject, one on wliich much more might be said, 

 were it not irrelevant to the character of this pubUcation ; and as it is, these 

 remarks are only admissible in virtue of their relation to architectural prece- 

 dent. Under these impressions it is that I come to the conclusion, that the 

 prejudices of society in favour of what is ancient are to be mainly ascribed 

 to classical education, and that the readiness with wliich architects accede to 

 the dogma of the unsurpassibility of ancient architecture is probably attri- 

 butable to the same cause. 



I quite agree with the opinion, tliat the study of existing specimens of 

 architecture is necessary for the cultivation of taste, and that taste requires 

 education as much as any other faculty, and I never for a moment intended 

 to imply any general disrespect for the works of antiquity : on the contrary, 

 I admire many examples, both classic and (lothic, perhaps as much as any 

 one. But there is a great difference between admiring an object because it ii 

 really beautiful, and admiring it because it is old, or because it is the work of 

 a certain people. There is a great difference between praising what is worthy 

 of praise, reserving to one's-sclf the right of censuring what docs not please, 

 and subscribing to a wholesale approval bf everything. There is a great 

 difference between studying examples handcil dunn to us with a view to the 

 cultivation of taste, and studying with the iutention of copying. 



II. S. 



Derby, Feb. 16. 



P.S. In the original paper, page 23, second colimiD, and the third line 

 from the bottom, for " ipuru" read " spread." 



N 2 



