1842. 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



327 



" and for this," as tlie Duchess of Marlborougli said, " he was con- 

 tent to be dragged up iu a basket three or four times a week." This 

 salary was, however, in the eyes of his owlish brother commissioners 

 too much, so that at one time they stopped half of it, under pretence 

 of obliging him to hasten the completion of the work. Among other 

 persecutions, they forced him against his own opinion to alter the de- 

 sign of his building, to put a balustrade on the outside, and to have the 

 interior of the dome decorated in perishable painting. Wren, never- 

 theless, notwithstanding his small allowances, did not die poor, he 

 accumulated enough to leave an estate behind him. 



As a man of science and of varied attainments, we have said 

 enough to show Wren's greatness ; we have now to consider him as 

 an artist ; and here we may observe, that of late years there seems as 

 much disposition to underrate Wren, as formerly the contrary bias 

 prevailed. Why this should be we do not well see — why Wren 

 should be tried by another standard than Palladio or Vignola, or 

 Perault and Mansard. This, however, is part of the fashion, we 

 may say, part of the errors, of the day. The gentle madness of the 

 age is to pUice the height of art in the mechanical copying in 

 milk-and-water colour of some ancient ediBce, and Wren's defect 

 vias a too g-?ner;il neglect of all rules of art. So far the antipathy 

 is readily accounted for, but it is not on these grounds tliat the 

 public will be induced to form its decision as to Wren's merits. 

 The public, whatever may be its failings as to technical criticism, 

 whatever may be its lenient tendency to grant magnificence on the 

 promptings of ignorance, has still some claim to exercise the " vox 

 dei " in matters of art, and will not sink, for trifling errors, prepon- 

 derating merits. The fault of Wren, decidedly, was his unacquaintance 

 with the details of his art, or inattention to them, and in the weighty 

 labours imposed upon him, there is great reason to fear that he 

 too often made his design on the promptings of the moment, without 

 discrimination, and without subsequent correction. His poverty on 

 many occasions, his misplaced luxuriance in others, his want of 

 breadth and repose, weakness of proportions, and disregard of styles, 

 are defects, which, seen unmitigated among bis successors, inspire 

 disgust, — but Wren had redeeming qualities. He had the eye of an 

 artist, he had great resources in unrivalled constructive skill, and 

 ■when he chose, knew equally how to unite the novel, the grand and 

 the picturesque. When, moreover, we consider him in relation to 

 the age in which he lived, the equally flagrant errors of his prede- 

 cessors and contemporaries, and that his labours in this country were 

 unexampled, he must be acknowledged to be a great name in art. 

 More errors, perhaps, can be detected in a single great work of 

 Wren, than in all the productions of a modern architect, but his 

 superiority remains unimpeached. Thus the last number of Black- 

 wood contains a prodigious mass of nonsense extracted from Macbeth, 

 and yet the merits of that great work of Shakspeare are still un- 

 shaken. Many of Wren's faults arise from the attempt after 

 novelty, a sin not too often committed now-a-days; but still "tine 

 belle fauie vaut mieux qii'une mediocre heauU':" As to Wren's neglect 

 of the gothic and defacement of it, however we may regret it, it was 

 a creed as orthodox in his day as the persecution of papists, and the 

 concoction of popish plots. Wren was only mad with tlie rest, but at 

 least he left some specimens of gothic more decent than anything 

 which appeared from his time to that of Horace Walpole. One of 

 his characteristics was a hankering after domes and skylights, which 

 he early manifested in his design for the repair of old St. Paul's. Wren 

 had at his disposal greater means than perhaps any other architect 

 ever possessed, and on the whole, he made a noble use of them ; but 

 we cannot observe without regret, that sums much larger than the 

 barn-church Commissioners allow in these days, were frequently ex- 

 pended without producing any eft'ect. 



As examples of Wren's most admired works, we may enumerate 

 St. Paul's Cathedral; the steeples of Dow Church; St. Bride's, and 

 St. Magnus the Martyr; Greenwich Hospital; and St. Lawrence, 

 Jewry, Cateaton Street. 



Of interiors— St. Stephen, Walbrook; St. Clement's Danes; St. 

 James's, Piccadilly ; Trinity College library, Cambridge ; St. Mil- 



dred's, Bread Street ; St. Bride's ; St. Mary, Abchurch ; and St. Ben- 

 net's, Threadneedle Street. 



Of the pointed style — St. Dunstan's in the East; St. Michael's, 

 Comhill; St. Mary, Aldermary ; All Souls' College, Oxford; and St. 

 Alban's, Wood Street. 



Of constructions — the dome of St. Paul's; the Monument; the 

 spire of St. Dunstan's in the East ; the roof of the Sheldonian 

 Theatre; the rejiair of Chichester Cathedral; the dome of St. An- 

 tholin's, Watling Street, &c. 



For drawing up these notices, we have availed ourselves of several 

 works, largely of those of Mr. Godwin and Mr. Elmes, but we have 

 felt that the life of Wren is yet to be written. The Parentalia is 

 only a chartulary, and Mr. Elmes' work, however copious, not ex- 

 hausting the subject, and containing much heterogeneous matter. It 

 is, nevertheless, at present, the only life of Wren, which deserves the 

 name. Mr. Cockerell has long been understood to have turned his 

 attention to this subject ; he has in the instance of the engraving 

 before us, exhibited his zeal ; his qualifications are generally ac- 

 knowledged, and he could not, therefore, do a greater service than to 

 execute this long expected task. Among the works to which the 

 reader may refer, are Wren's Parentalia, Elmes' Life of Wren, God- 

 win and Britton's Churches of London, Britton and Pugin's Public 

 Buildings, London, Ward's Gresham Pofessors, the Useful Knowledge 

 Life of Wren, Chalmer's Biographical Dictionary, Sn;. Portraits of 

 Wren are to be found in the Royal Society's Collection, the Sheldo- 

 nian Theatre, and Salters' Hall, and a bust in All Souls' College, 

 Oxford. 



On the 2Gth of July, 1664, the first stone was laid of the Sheldo- 

 nian Theatre, at Oxford, (No. 58,) completed 1669, the expense of 

 which, was £12,470 lis. \d., contributed by the munificent Abp. 

 Sheldon. This is one of the earliest of Wren's works, and the 

 ground plan of it was adopted by him from that of the theatre of 

 Marcellus, at Rome, and so arranged as to receive 4000 persons. 

 The roof, 80 feet by 70, rests upon the side walls without crossbeams, 

 and is one of the first and most admired examples of that practice. 

 In 1800 it was discovered to be in danger of falling, and another 

 roof substituted (for a description and engravings of the roof, see 

 Plot's Oxfordshire, Wren's Parentalia, and Elmes' Wren.) 



In 1663, he built the chapel of Pembroke College, Cambridge, at 

 the expense of his uncle Bishop Wren. It is 54 feet long by 24 

 broad, and 30 feet high. The front is of four Corinthian pilasters. 



In 1664, he was employed at Oxford in rebuilding Trinity College. 

 A new court of three sides is among these works, the north side of 

 which was completed in 1667, the west side in 1682, and the south 

 side in 1728. The first stone of the chapel (Xo. 59), was laid on the 

 0th July, 1691, and the shell completed at the expense of £2000, 

 contributed by Dr. Bathurst. It is of the Corinthian order. 



In 1665, he was called upon to furnish designs for the magnificent 

 Library of Trinity College, Cambridge, (No. 61,) which cost £20,000, 

 and is 200 feet long, 40 feet broad, and 38 high, interior measurement. 

 It has two fronts. 



In 1668, he was again employed by Archbishop Sancroft, to build a 

 chapel for Emanuel College, Cambridge. This chapel, including the 

 ante-chapel, is 84 feet long, 30 broad, and 27 high; the floor of 

 marble, and the ceiling richly ornamented in stucco. It was finished 

 in 1677. 



In 1668, Wren built the old Custom House, (No. 47,) which was 

 burned down in 1718, being the only one of his buildings, as Elmes 

 remarks, of which, in the course of a long life, he witnessed the 

 destruction, a fortune not always attendant upon architects. 



In the same year, he was called upon to report upon the state of 

 the spire of Salisbury Cathedral, which he did in an interesting 

 document. 



In 1670, he began Temple Bar, (No. 35,) finished in 1672. 



In 1671, he began the Monument, (No. 39,) which was completed 

 in 1677. Its height from the pavement, is 202 feet, (30 feet higher 

 than the column of Antoninus,) and stands on a palladian Pedestal, of 

 2 1 feet square, the plinth being 27 feet. The lower diameter of the 



2 Z 2 



