ARCHITECTURAL SCULPTURE. 
745 
4. — ARCHITECTURAL SCULPTURE. 
By PERCY F. HOCKIJYGS , A.R.I.B.A. 
The title I have chosen for my paper, “Architectural Sculpture,” is 
a short one, but indicates a very large subject. It is a subject, more- 
over, which unfortunately is not thought equally important in the two 
branches of work represented in this section, and tends rather to theory. 
I think, however, that the subject is worthy of attention from both 
engineers and architects, and so have tried to seize and illustrate some- 
of the general principles in this field of art, which is too little regarded 
as an integral part of our work. 
I use the term “Architectural Sculpture,” as distinguished from 
gallery work, to include all sculpture designed for the decoration of 
buildings, and I wish to include those works in clay and metal, which, 
though they are not sculpture in the strict use of the term, are used to 
the same end and are governed by the same considerations. 
The so-called gallery sculpture is work which is designed to be 
looked upon as complete in itself ; and, either through over-finish or 
want of scale, does not harmonise with its architectural surroundings, 
thus throwing aside the true office of sculpture, that of decoration, 
and aiming at independent rank. 
The distinction between the two is a comparatively modern one, for 
until late Renaissance times there was no real gallery sculpture pro- 
duced; and sculpture held its place at the head of the other decorative 
arts — painting, carving, inlaying, and casting. Eor in former periods 
architecture was rightly recognised as the alma mater of all the arts ; 
and it was recognised also that perfect work could only be produced 
by a judicious combination of the whole. All the arts are allied, but 
the connection between architecture and sculpture is more natural 
and effective than between architecture and any of the others, for the 
materials used are in most instances the same, and sculpture is quite 
part of the mother art. 
The most natural way to approach our subject is by studying the 
treatments presented by designs of former times, in order that we 
may see the forms architectural sculpture has appeared in, and the uses 
to which it has been applied. Then, having investigated the bases 
upon which the designers worked, and the limitations which they 
recognised, we may formulate canons for our future guidance. 
Beginning, then, with the rude scratebings found among the 
records of all nations, we find little of use to us before Egyptian 
work, the best of which was produced about 3000 R c. In this the 
most admirable point is the harmony between the stiff conventional 
figures and the simple severe architecture of the period, adding greatly 
to its impressiveness and interest. After a long decadence Greek 
work comes uuder our notice — the early efforts following Egyptian 
models, but, after a couple of centuries of development, arriving at 
a state of practical perfection under Phidias about 430 u c. The 
careful adjustment of conventionality and grace, and the improved 
modelling, suited well the exquisitely delicate architecture of the 
period; and we may also note, in passing, how the angularity, the 
determined use of the straight line, is retained, and how well it accords 
with the rectilinear architecture. 
