14S 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECTS JOURNAL. 



[May, 



■windows of a mason and a carpenter. And thus we may find the true 

 value of Grecian architecture ; learning between it and modern adap- 

 tations to choose a style which shall neither offend by its anachro- 

 nisms, nor subject us to any diminution of our necessary comforts, 

 designing as Greeks would have designed, had their wants been like 

 ours. Our buildings must be Grecian in essence rather than in form. 



E. H. 



CANDIDUS'S NOTE-BOOK. 

 FASCICULUS XXXVII. 



" I must have liberly 

 Withal, as large a charter as the winds. 

 To blow on whom 1 please.'' 



I. There is one circumstance attending architecture at the present 

 day, which has not had the attention and consideration given to it, it 

 deserves ; for while so much has been said in regard to the merits 

 and the history of different styles, it has scarcely been noticed that 

 we possess no real style of our own. We may adopt, we may borrow, 

 we may revive, those belonging to other countries, or other times; 

 yet that amounts to no more than the transplantation of them, and, 

 unluckily, the process itself seldom turns out to be any better than 

 that of transplanting dtad Irut. However successful particular build- 

 ings maybe as imitations, the styles themselves do not take root; 

 they exhibit no symptoms of vitality; they do not grom; they put 

 forth no fresh branches : on the contrary, the chances are that some 

 of the old ones are lopped off. By this time it might be supposed 

 Grecian architecture would, if capable of striking root at all, have 

 begun to manifest some vigour, yet it thrives no better than a mere 

 sapless trunk. We began by copying it, we continue to copy it, and 

 are not likely to get any further than copying if. We have got our 

 lessons in it by heart, and repeat them by rote ; as to getting them by 

 liead — that is a different matter, and one of which the idea seems to 

 have occurred to no one. We proceed with it just as far as the 

 extant examples of it will carry us, and not a single inch further. 

 Nearly half a century ago we had Doric porticos after the Parthenon — 

 attglicized, indeed, by sculpture being omitted in the metopes, and if 

 we now want a portico in the Doric style, we still go to the Parthenon, 

 or at least to some other established authority, whose columns are as 

 scrupulously copied as if the modern building were intended to be a 

 perfect fac-simile of the ancient one, though it may be impossible to 

 trace the slightest similarity between them except that attending the 

 columns alone. More frequently, too, than not, these last, so far from 

 contributing to style, only serve to show the mutual incongruity be- 

 tween themselves and all the rest, the portico being as little in har- 

 mony with the building as the building is with the portico. This 

 system of servile copying — in any other art it would be reprobated 

 as downright plagiarism and piracy — has absolutely stifled the germs 

 of invention, and checked all originality and artistical feeling, which, 

 instead of being encouraged, are actually deprecated as leading to 

 innovation. What a bugbear word is that same "innovation"! 

 Surely, if authority and precedent be of any value, there is abundance 

 of both to sanction innovation, for what is the history of architecture 

 itself, but that of a series of innovations. Without innovation the 

 Greeks would never have advanced beyond their Doric style, and our 

 own ancestors would have stuck fast at their Norman one: or if intro- 

 duced at all, never would the pointed style have attained that growth, 

 or spread out into that rich luxuriance it ultimately attained, after 

 passing through various stages of — innovation. 



II. Well, now that we have again turned to the lancet or first stage of 

 the pointed style, there is no danger whatever of its shooting out afresh. 

 As lately adopted, it is not an infant style of our own : of the promise 



of early childhood it possesses nothing, of the hopeless imbecility of 

 second childhood and childishness, much. Are we then to conclude 

 that the inventive powers of architecture are now utterly paralyzed — 

 that as an art it is extinct, and reduced to what is little better than a 

 mechanical profession. The plodders in it are many, those who as- 

 piie to be more than plodders, who apply themselves to architecture 

 with the feelings of real artists, are — I will not say how few ; but 

 leave it to every one to judge if he himself is among those few in 

 whose favour I throw in that saving clause, lest I myself should be 

 claiced and clapperclawed by the whole of them. No one will now 

 cry out; not even Professor Brown, since he will, doubtless, think be 

 must be upon the list of my exceptions. 



III. It has been remarked, in regard to despotism, that bad as it 

 may generally be in practice, it is theoretically better than freedom; 

 which doctrine, strange as it may be tliought by Englishmen, seems to 

 be that of architects, for they preach in favour of the despotism of 

 authority and of slavish submission to precedents. One of their 

 oriental maxims is that what has hitherto served and satisfied those who 

 have gone before us, may very well satisfy us. Of innovation they 

 entertain a most oriental horror. Enamoured of slavery, they depre- 

 cate artistical freedom, and hug their fetters the more closely when 

 any one proposes to knock them off. Like Russian serfs, they do not 

 care to be emancipated ; for they have so long been accustomed to 

 slavery, that to be now released from it would be exceedingly uncom" 

 fortable to them. They prefer remaining always in leading strings ; 

 since it is far easier to suffer themselves to be so guided, than it would 

 be for them to attempt to guide themselves. Most assuredly it is 

 very far easier to follow rides so plain and straightforward that they 

 cannot be missed by any one who is capable of following his own nose, 

 than it is to hunt after and put oneself under the guidance oi principles 

 — little better than so many will-o'-the-wisp phantoms. Rules, on 

 the contrary, are exceedingly safe, and admirably convenient; they 

 spare a great dealiioth of time and thought: should yoii happen to 

 go wrong, the fault lies with them, not with yourself ; or rather, as 

 they cannot be otherwise than right, you cannot possibly be wrong. 

 In defiance of every blunder or sin against good taste, you can quote 

 Palladio or some other great authority. There is no architectural 

 vice or absurdity for which some " venerable " and respectable prece- 

 dent may not be adduced, and if your doings in the Grecian style are 

 reproached for being mawkishly insipid, frigid, common-place, and 

 dull, you can shelter yourself under the very respectable authority of 

 that very classical architect — Smirke. 



IV. The more it is examined into, the more untenable will that 

 doctrine be found which refers the origin of the Grecian orders to a 

 timber construction and to the primeval wooden hut. Such notion is 

 absolutely preposterous; not only is it rebutted by the character of 

 the style itself, but is utterly at variance with all historical analogy. 

 The farther we go back into our researches, the more direct evidence 

 do we obtain that the very earliest architectural monuments of all 

 were entirely of massive atone, and that so far from resembling even the 

 the trunks of trees, the columns were merely upright monolithic blocks, 

 nearly square throughout, with at first very little indication of circular 

 shaft, except in the upper part, beneath the capital, to which it served 

 as stem. Such is the ancient architecture of India, the earliest of all 

 — ponderous, rude, gigantic, and sublime. Borrowed, though not 

 copied by the Egyptians, this style underwent a transformation ; it was 

 considerably refined ; the columns or supporting blocks were made 

 circular throughout, if not invariably cylindrical. Borrowed in its 

 turn, but not copied by the Greeks, the Egyptian style underwent a 

 similar process of transformation, and was moulded into the Doric, 

 the cylindrical form of the columns being changed into a conical or 

 tapering one. Such origin plainly accounts for the proportions — so 

 much prated of, and apparently so little understood — of Grecian archi- 

 tecture ; whereas they are not at all to be reconciled with the idea of 

 an original timber construction, originating in the brains of "venerable " 

 old women who have written upon architecture, and received as mat- 

 ter of faith by those who find it much easier to believe any nonsense 

 than to examine and inquire. Would even the most massive timber 



